User talk:Coin945/Archive 4

Nomination of Hedyot for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hedyot 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/Hedyot until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Gsingh (talk) 06:26, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Coin945, as you've created a lot of these "definition only" and "cut and paste" articles, I'd suggest reading the essay User:Uncle G/Cargo cult encyclopaedia article writing. It advises against your style of article creation. Fences  &amp;  Windows  23:01, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, your pattern of gathering quotes about words and phrases fits exactly with what Wiktionary welcomes. You may enjoy creating or expanding their dictionary entries that define words and phrases. See their community portal for how to start. Be warned though, they're very strict on formatting requirements and you need to properly attest that the word is used and defined as you've written using durably archived sources, e.g. books and newspapers. Fences  &amp;  Windows  23:06, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

links to dab pages
You removed a message with edit summary "this is false. those links are not to disambiguation pages at all..... weird....", but all the four links listed were to dab pages. Have another look at the notification. Pam D  12:13, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Page moves
I think your page moves around "international relations" may be unhelpful. Why move Neorealism (international relations) to Neorealism in international relations? They do not mean the same thing. The former is about an international relations concept called neorealism, as distinct from concepts in other disciplines which use the same name. The latter is about a more general topoic called "neorealism", as used or applied within international relations (would be appropriate for "Foreign language skills in international relations" perhaps). The Postcolonialism and international relations theory is just that: an article about theory. You have renamed it Postcolonialism in international relations which does not seem to be the same thing. Please do not rename (move) articles unless you have a good reason and a good understanding of the subject matter involved. I've mentioned this at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_International_relations, to get a more expert view. Pam D  12:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Bimoment for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bimoment 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/Bimoment (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 02:04, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Cultural probe for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cultural probe 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/Cultural probe (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:33, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Doctor blade
I came across this while stub-sorting. Please remember to give a context so that someone coming across the article by hitting the "random article" is shown what it's about. You mentioned in the edit summary that the blade is mentioned in the Rotogravure article: it makes sense to include both a mention of that process as context and a link to the article. I've done that now.

Please also remember that the references ought to include enough information for someone to be able to see where the information has come from without following the link - either because they are looking at a printout of the article, or because the web link isn't working either temporarily or permanently. So please use a few more fields of the cite web template. Thanks. Pam D  09:00, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Deletion notifications
Hi,

You recently received a message about either "Articles for Deletion" or "Proposed Deletion" of an article you created. I'd like to ask you a few quick questions, so that we can try to improve those notices in a WikiProject I work with:


 * 1) Was the message helpful? Were the instructions clear and easy to follow?
 * 2) If not, how do you think the message could be improved?
 * 3) What do you think about the deletion process in general? Do you understand how to contest a deletion?

Feel free to answer here or send me your response by email (swalling@undefinedwikimedia.org). I won't quote you or link your answers to your username if you don't feel comfortable with that. Your feedback is incredibly useful for improving the content of deletion notifications, so please take a minute to think about and answer these questions.

Thank you! Steven Walling (WMF) &bull; talk   23:56, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 1 hour rule


The article 1 hour rule has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Neologism with no indication of widespread use

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Rorshacma (talk) 18:43, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Examples on Eggcorn
Hello Coin945. You recently added an example to the page Eggcorn and marked the edit as minor. Please remember to mark your edits as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content.

Editors at Eggcorn (including me) prefer that examples be discussed at Talk:Eggcorn before they are added to the article. Your comments are welcome there. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 06:11, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Atheocracy for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Atheocracy 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/Atheocracy (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Pichpich (talk) 14:38, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposal at Village Pump
I have started a discussion with a vote that you may or may not be interested in. Since you participated in a discussion yesterday which was similar, I am sending you this notice: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Proposal_for_message_for_new_editors_creating_new_article. Mugginsx (talk) 17:07, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Article of the Month
I proposed something yonks ago about an Article of the Month and a Core Article of the Month contest with a $500 Amazon vouchers prize for best article. I thought it would be a great way to lure in new contributors as well as get regulars such as myself to try that bit harder. Heard nothing back, and a friend of mind personally asked the foundation about it in California. Its disappointing that they don't see the potential in it.♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:28, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * .....yeah, I'm starting to see just how stubborn the community is (:P). When any system has come along this far, the damn bureaucracy of it all is naturally going to make people resistant to big changes. Didn't realise how much opposition there would be to the proposal. Whatever happened to "give it a shot and see if it works" lol? I love your idea. Any chance you would repitch it?--Coin945 (talk) 22:15, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Can't remember where it is, but there's this page (you probably already know about it) where you can put up monetary arrangements for people who complete a task you lay for them. You could get the Wiki Foundation to add this proposal there on a monthly basis, and then award prizes accordingly. Hmmm.. I wonder how you'd pick the best article of the week... I can imagine you'd get a lot of flack from the people who didn't win...--Coin945 (talk) 22:22, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

History of the Israel national football team
Hi. In case it's no longer on your watch list, this is just to let you know that I've reopened the discussion at Talk:Israel national football team. I feel the destiny of the History article needs to be decided one way or another. (I'm sending this to all three people who took part in last year's discussion). Best regards, --Stfg (talk) 13:45, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Pen clicking for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pen clicking 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/Pen clicking 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 template from the top of the article. JoelWhy (talk) 15:31, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Car sex
If you are so much convinced about its notability, could you please expand it a more bit and add some more sources? If more quality sources are added, I'll withdraw the nom. -- Supernova Explosion   Talk  02:03, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * See Reliable_sources/Noticeboard. -- Supernova Explosion   Talk  10:39, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Your Smash song articles
As apparently you are not willing to read WP:NSONG I will post the important stuff here for you: I chose to redirect per this guideline rather than nominate for deletion. You state in an edit summary "The article as it stands should be proof to you that the song is notable", what because there's loads of text? Your coverage amounts to blogs and fleeting mentions, I hardly think TV is my pacifier or Bitch stole my remote pass the test of reliable sources. So either I redirect them (again) to the relevant episodes or I nominate them for deletion. Which do you prefer?  Captain Screebo Parley! 13:56, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song. Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable. Notability aside, a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article;
 * AFD, please. Bring it on. :)--Coin945 (talk) 15:25, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * (that was a joke btw, not trying to be a pretentious a**hole or anything :P). Look, the thing is, these songs have been referenced in many top reviews that review the episodes as a whole but also write lots of stuff about the individual songs. Yes, the articles that I created today didn't have as much time invested into them to get the source juices flowing to full power, than those I created yesterday, but the few sources (at least) that I've stuffed into each article show that each song has been written about a lot (Notability aside, a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article). Those blogs of which you speak were only in a couple of the articles, and yet you redirected the entire bunch...... why, I don't know. I firmly believe that each song deserves a place in Wikipedia, and I do honestly believe that your rash reverts were uncalled for. I am intrigued to see what the wider community say, and as the creator of the articles, I sincerely hope you are crushed like a bug! :D (once again, a harmless joke).--Coin945 (talk) 15:25, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * While I appreciate your enthusiasm, I think you are misguided when you say "have been referenced in many top reviews", no they haven't, I have looked through them and there is hardly anything that qualifies as a reliable secondary source, and on the few occasions that i found one, there was only the fleetingest of mentions of the said song. You quote "Notability aside, etc.", this means that a) the song must meet the notability requirements set out above and b) needs to be covered in depth by reliable third-party sources.  Captain Screebo Parley! 16:02, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I personally find that hard to believe. Whilst sourcing my articles, I came across some very well respected names - A.V Club, Broadwayworld.com, Chicago Tribute, Los Angeles Times, PopCrush, TVLine, EW.com etc. Obviously the most amount of sources are for Let Me Be Your Star, but that is also due to the fact that I made that article first so invested the most amount of time into it. As I went along, I invested less and less time into each on because I was raring to make the next one. Just because the sources aren't in the article, it doesn't mean they don't exist. I simply made a template - a stub - that could then be added to afterwards. My articles are no finished product, and you should not be judging them as such. I'm sure the sources are out there, and that they just have to be found. You redirecting the articles after barely 2 days is like... WHAT?!! To put it bluntly and simply, I think your actions were wrong. As it is 1:00am over here in Perth and I'm really tired right now, I won't take any more action now but tomorrow if you haven't reverted your own redirects and/or AFD'ed the articles, then I will unredirect them myself because during all this chatter, Smash fans may very well've worked on he articles to being them up to code. With all the articles being in tumbolia, no progress will be done on the articles at all. As a side note, obviously the whole "I've put a lot of effort into these articles so keep them and leave me the bloody hell alone!!!" thing comes into it a bit, I must admit, but I do firmly believe that the articles have a place on Wikipedia.--Coin945 (talk) 17:17, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Comparison of General American and Received Pronunciation
I support this move, but I think we should move the other GA/RP comparison articles to "Comparison between" etcetera. Inter change  able  21:58, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh... sure! If that is more grammatically correct, then go ahead. :)--Coin945 (talk) 03:23, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This isn't about grammar; it's about consistency. And I'm reluctant to move pages, having been the instigator of a move war a while ago. Inter  change  able  17:24, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm.... are you sure "comparison between" is consistant? In my newly created article list of comparison articles i added all of them i could find and i hardly found any named like that. Perhaps you could direct me to some? Are you just referring to the ga/rp ones? Btw im sorry about your bad experiences.... wikipedia isnt always the nicest place to be.... it seems less and less joyous editing these days :( --Coin945 (talk) 23:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

New Wikiproject you might be interested in
Hello. I've known that in the past you have created articles from the requested articles list and I thought you might be interested in the new wikiproject that has just started: WikiProject Requested articles. Perhaps you'll consider joining and lending some suggestions. All the best, France 3470   ( talk )


 * Thankuou very much for considering me in this endevour. ;D The first thing that springs to mind is my failed proposal to have the "100 articles of the week" to create, as a section on the main page - my advice was to get it up and running first, then obly re-propose until it had enough followers. Perhs we can incorporate this into the project. Im on my phone atm but ill add more details about that proposal later :) Crux of the comment: id love to join and ill see what i can do.

Zambrano family

 * I think what you've done here is a good idea, but I think you've chose poor sources for your effort. This is a site that exists solely to sell made up family crests to suckers who think they are authentic.  There is nothing on that site that indicates that any legitimate research has gone into the crest design or the family name history.  The crest there does not match the crest shown at the DNA site, which appears more in line with other crests I have found for this family.  I'm going to withdraw the AFD -- my further research indicates that the Diccionario reference may well be more reliable than I had thought, once one realizes that it is referencing Philip I of Castile, and not Philip I of France.  I think there may be an article here after all; let's see what we can find!  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:36, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Sound good. Sorry for being duped by that questionable source... *blush*. But as I said, I think whatsoever we do, the page will eventually become redundant and the content will just be moved into the Zambrano article anyways, so (as I said on the AFD), instead of being a list article, it becomes a prose article discussing the geo-political history of the name etc.--Coin945 (talk) 12:41, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, what words have you been including in your search to narrow down the results? Just typing in "Zambrano" isn't very helpful at all... :/--Coin945 (talk) 12:46, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I definitely think that the DNA site is a brilliant one, and so is that site you were talking about earlier so will have to go through that with a fine tooth comb and extract all the good info that we can from it. I found this, which essentially has all the records for people with this surname in censuses etc. I'm not sure how that information would be useful to the Wiki article just yet, but I thought I'd send you a link to it anyways.--Coin945 (talk) 13:11, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree with you about the "brilliance" of the DNA project. It is part of a large commercial site to attempt to use DNA to extend family genealogies, and is fairly commonplace.  Take a look at what I've done in my userspace, at User:WikiDan61/Zambrano family and let me know if you think I've got something we can work with.  By the way, the addition of the Japanese kanji equivalent of the name seems just silly.  Any name, when rendered in kanji, will have a meaning that is quite unrelated to the actual meaning of the name.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:23, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * True. Haha I'm not even sure why I added it in in the first place. YOu're right - it's completely unencyclopedic. Are you sure about that DNA source? It seems to have some incredible useful info about the origins/history of the surname, which makes sense because they would have to have done a lot of research to allow to the project to function. It seems well-researched and very thorough....--Coin945 (talk) 14:40, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * What you've done with the article is awesome. I had a hard time reading that Spanish article well, so I'm very glad you could salvage some great info from it. You mentioned something about some of my sourced not being very reliable? Perhaps you can copy your article text into my article, and then help me get rid of the fluff.--Coin945 (talk) 14:45, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Spider-Man move
Hi, Coin. I understand your grammatical concern, but we don't unilaterally move pages without talk-page discussion. First of all, there is no article titled Batman in media, as you wrote in your edit summary at Spider-Man in other media. Secondly, "in other media" is standard Wikipedia phrasing that takes into account a character appearing in other media than comic books, such as film, television, books, etc. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:35, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, you're absolutely right. It may not sound grammatically correct to me, but it appears that the rest of Wikipedia disagrees. I apologize for my action. But I must admit, that it truly makes no sense to have an article about everything Spiderman has been in except the original source material. IMHO, these types of articles should be a sort of directory for information about the various types of media a character is involved in. So, it would then have a summary of each medium, and then by clicking on the "Main Page" link at the top of the desired medium, you would then go to the correct Wiki page. That seems much better. (as a side note, I was referring to the article Batman franchise media).--Coin945 (talk) 21:22, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

List of knitting patterns
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of knitting patterns, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.free-knit-stitch.com.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 13:34, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of knitting patterns


The article List of knitting patterns has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Not useful. Copyright status dubious. Site from which it is lifted now added as External Link to the existing List of knitting stitches.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pam D  16:38, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Repost of Playlist (album series)
A tag has been placed on requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion  tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit |the page's discussion directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of recreating the page. Thank you. While some of the individual albums in the series may have received reviews and have articles, that does not make the series as a whole notable without indepenent reliable coverage about the series itself. Please take this to deletion review if you feel differently. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 00:11, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=|link=]] Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 16:53, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

AfD
Today's AfD log  Equazcion  ( talk )  22:35, 25 Jun 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Aria Film Poster.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Aria Film Poster.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Page move for companies list
Hi- just a FYI that I reverted your page move here because it didn't follow the established naming conventions for that type of list article. Please see the related Category:Lists of companies by country to see the pattern of naming. Thanks, --Funandtrvl (talk) 17:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of criticism and critique articles for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of criticism and critique articles 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/List of criticism and critique articles 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 template from the top of the article.  W.  D.   Graham  14:59, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Just Do It (Niké)


Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Just Do It (Niké). First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Nike, Inc.. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Nike, Inc. - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Pam D  22:39, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Just Do It (Niké) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Just Do It (Niké) 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/Just Do It (Niké) 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 template from the top of the article. Pam D  06:53, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Prize Players.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Prize Players.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:41, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Hatting comment on the main page
I'm not going to edit war with you over the content on Talk:Main Page; however, I suggest you self-revert. You are already engaged in an edit war (and a ridiculous one at that). If you want the tip of the day collapsed, then collapse the tip of the day, don't collapse Sun Creator's comment. Your edit is not in compliance with Refactoring talk pages, specifically non-contentious cleanup since I have found it contentious. Ryan Vesey 04:23, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


 * As soon as I made that revert, I realised immediately that i didn't want an edit war either. Neither do I wnt to be disruptive or a vandal. I merely did what I thought I was right to do under the circumstances. I did not know I was going against any policy, and I certainly didn't want to engage in a petty war at all. Sorry for this whole debacle.--Coin945 (talk) 04:37, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Featured articles
In addition to what I said at the village pump, in your "this has been a pet peeve for many editors for ages" define many, define "for ages" (2004 to now). I see many more editors not concerned, all those hundreds who don't speak up there, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:15, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. You are right. That is based on the supports the discussion has gotten so far. But there are many more opposes. I do not mean to start a fight, and I do not wish to start a heated argument with you. No, I do not have the facts and figures in my possession, and that was indeed a hyperbolous statement based on what I had observed in the discussion at Villagepump:Proposals. As I have said in my revised opening statement, I am not trying to be that guy who doesn't know what he's talking about who's trying to come in and completely change the way the featured article people to their thing. I was just trying to start a discussion on a topic that I don't think has been started before. If the discussion closes in favour of the opposes, so be it.--Coin945 (talk) 13:48, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair. I try to live here in peace and remember only one "heated argument" about the name of Beethoven's 14th piano sonata. It ended with finding out that the one who started it all did not understand the concept of redirect and pipe link. If you want to call the articles a different name, you can always create redirects and piped links. I personally have no time for the effort of renaming while the true problem is how the TFAs are selected, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:10, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Amphidiscosa
Could you do the following to fix up Amphidiscosa please? Thank you so much! -- Cheers,  Riley Huntley talk  02:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Remove the answer reference, it is not reliable.
 * 2) Cite the authority
 * 3) Remove the quoted sentences and write them in your own words.
 * 4) Add the appropriate WikiProject Banner to the talk page. The article is of low importance and a stub. A photo is needed. "|importance=low|class=stub|photo-needed=yes"

VPP revert
Sorry, I was trying to revert the edit of DeltaQuad's comment by that IP. I unintentionally ended up deleting other comments. I should refresh my watchlist more.--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * No harm done :) --Coin945 (talk) 02:40, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Circuit analogy water pipes big.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Circuit analogy water pipes big.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 19:13, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

One million and a half stars for you!
Hiya, Coin, some addition you've made to the HH page!! Just what it was lacking: a bit of background information and the connection between the book series and the TV show. I've added some bits and bobs here and there (especially in the Critical response), tough nowt really significant, as I focused on the proofreading thingy and the writing style: the Episodes section's a bit of a cock-up – oooooops, hope you don't mind my swearing like trooper –, a sloppy copy'n'paste from the the British Comedy Guide site or summat like that, what you reckon? Well, this is all for now. Glad to have run into you in these virtual neck of the virtual woods – the talk page of the article is creepily dead. Made me feel all alone. Best, --Cocolacoste (talk) 02:51, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey Cocolacoste. It's very nice to meet you! I'm very glad that you have the same passion with Horrible Histories as I do. I've loved them forever. I used to read the books and all of HH's spinoff series (Horrible Geography/Horribly Famous/Murderous Maths/The Knowledge etc.) all the time, and  still do! I loved the animated series, and have now fallen head over heels with the new live-action one. I worked really hard on the article on the book series for a while ago, but haven't really been into editing these articles until today! Yeah. I totally agree - its just what the article's been lacking... and guess what? The information I've added is all from 1 source - a YouTube clip that is a Horrible Histories Masterclass - pretty much a guy sitting down to chat with 4 of the cast and crew for an hour. Once I'm done with this clip, I may even get onto adding information from other series. However, I really would like to start editing another of my favourite 90's series - the Carmen Sandiego franchise, so I can't promise anything *blush* :D. I've seen your edits, and I have to say, great job man! You've done an awesome job tidying this (as you say) cock-up of an article.. haha and I don't mind the swearing one bit. When I first saw the state of it, it scared me to death. I didn't even know where to begin. I suck and editing tables so I just kinda left it haha. Yeah.. a lot of sound[ed] really promotional... until you fixed it all up, that is. Thanks again! Yeah its great to meet you... Wikipedia can be a very lonely place. But don't let it get you down haha. Now that we've found each other, we can work together, and be THE BEST WIKI-DUO EVAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! ;D--Coin945 (talk) 15:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


 * (P.S. asl = male, 18, Australia)--Coin945 (talk) 15:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Me too!! I really dig HH, so fantastically written and acted!! Oddly enough, I discovered it only last year, when a friend recommend it to me, but have been DEVOURING each episode ever since.
 * Yeah, I saw that YTube clip a while ago. There's also this one: http://www.bfi.org.uk/live/video/920, have a squint at it if you feel like it.
 * Thanks ever so much for your kind comments on my edits, however there are still lotsa things to be done.
 * Ramdom – and p'haps wrong – remarks about your additions: I'd remove the "Characters and Costuming" subsection as they're a tad irrelevant and seem written from a fan's point of view. Would keep this paragraph, though ("The makeup artists have properly researched and historically accurate picture of people from the various eras covered on the show. Ros Little, the costume designer, is "obsessive about the detail of the costumes". Sometimes the production team who are not in the historical side of the program say "it's fine" despite minor anachronisms. Farbeby argues that having non-historical costuming actually helps characterisation by allowing the characters to naturally look silly, as opposed to in a serious period piece. The costume designers and makeup artists work together closely with the historical consultants"), and put it into the Production section. What you reckon? Plus, there are a few slip-ups (typos and shit), will get round into subediting it asap – Obsessive, moi? Naaah.
 * One last thing: in my last edit (before yours) I cut this out (Ben Willbond explained that "you have to be good" to do this sort of green screen acting) 'cause I think B. Willbond is just taking the piss outta the die-hard "Method" actors, as they do in many of the Behind the scenes bits (like the Dance Masterclass one, or the one when M. Baynton interviews himself). Correct me if I'm wrong, please, and I'll fix it.
 * Congratuverylations to the new Wiki duo!!! By the way, I'm a woman and live in the arse end of nowhere (aka Argentina)

PS, Will add your talk page to my watch list so that I can see your replies –I came across this one quite by chance. --Cocolacoste (talk) 00:48, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Four Carmen Sandiego game floppy disks.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Four Carmen Sandiego game floppy disks.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:23, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Carmen Sandiego (franchise)
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Carmen Sandiego (franchise) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Cut and paste move repair holding pen. And please don't blank pages, whatever the reason. — Smjg (talk) 10:08, 27 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Your last edit summary: "Gotcha. So I need to delete this page first, and then move the other page here, Well I guess I need to blank it and wait for someone with the authority to delete it... :)" I've just told you what you need to do.  You need to list the page on WP:RM.  And you must not blank a page, regardless of reason. — Smjg (talk) 10:17, 27 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't really see why.... the move is not controversial at all, and is in fact me rectifying a mistake that I made. Why waste people's valuable time at that page when the answer is staring us both right in the face? I'm sorry, but I honestly think you have a bit too much dependency on bureaucracy, when in this case simple common sense will do.--Coin945 (talk) 10:33, 27 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I am not a bureaucrat. Just like most of the people who leave messages on your talk page, I am just an ordinary WP editor trying to maintain the wiki's integrity.  Moreover, most WP rules have reasons for them.  As for the ones of relevance here, just so that you know for the future:
 * Page histories are designed to show the evolution of an article over time, which is necessary for various purposes. If an article is moved to a different title, it is still in principle the same article, and so the page history needs to move with it.  Using the page move facility achieves this; cutting and pasting the content into another article breaks it.
 * If you blank a page, then sooner or later somebody will come to the blank page and wonder what on earth is going on, or assume that the site is down.
 * But policies aside, blanking a page does nothing to speed up the process of getting another page moved into its place, since an admin will have to delete it anyway. If anything, it probably slows it down, as admins will have to work out what the intention is, and other users will likely revert the blanking as vandalism in the interim.  On the other hand, either listing the page at WP:RM, or tagging the destination page with db-move if it really is uncontroversial, does help to achieve what you're trying to do.
 * Anyway, thank you for your cooperation. — Smjg (talk) 15:00, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Where in Time Is Carmen Sandiego?, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Vikings (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Four Carmen Sandiego game floppy disks.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Four Carmen Sandiego game floppy disks.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that this media item is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media item could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media item is not replaceable, please:


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

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. — ξ xplicit  00:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I think I used to wrong rationale.... the file in question is from flickr, and is under the creative commons license allowing us "to Share [and] to Remix" the image. I'm pretty sure all we have to do is swap rationales, although I am not sure how to do that...--Coin945 (talk) 08:25, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Carmen Sandiego's Great Chase Through Time (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to The Vikings


 * Where in Time Is Carmen Sandiego? (1989) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Clue


 * Where in the U.S.A. Is Carmen Sandiego? (1996) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Kitty Hawk

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Plasmo, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tony Wright and Anthony Lawrence (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:25, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Main Theme Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego .ogg
Thanks for uploading File:Main Theme Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego .ogg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:05, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Carmen Sandiego cases.jpg
The image dimensions were too large to comply with WP:NFC (please see), and it has been reduced to the largest size which I felt were easily justified. Some text details were unfortunately reduced to illegibility. If you wish to include the box text details in the image Description template, feel free. The details may need to be summarized, however, to avoid further copyright violation of the box text (since it's a creative work in itself). To discuss, and possibly get consensus for a larger reduced image, feel free to raise this at Media copyright questions. --Lexein (talk) 11:44, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Romanian Revolution of 1989
Hi. I moved the page back to Romanian Revolution of 1989 because it's not the only Romanian Revolution - the other revolution is the Wallachian Revolution of 1848 (which is often bundled with the Moldavian Revolution of 1848 as the Romanian Revolution of 1848). I made a disambiguation page for this: Romanian Revolution (disambiguation). bogdan (talk) 18:58, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that.... The fact that Romanian revolution redirected there really threw me haha. It made the move seem like an obvious choice. However, sometimes where you're bold you make mistakes. I'm glad it's all sorted out now.--Coin945 (talk) 19:04, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carmen Sandiego's Great Chase Through Time, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Where in Time Is Carmen Sandiego? (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

November 2012
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Carmen Sandiego's Great Chase Through Time does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Odie5533 (talk) 19:33, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Great Chase Through Time gameplay1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Great Chase Through Time gameplay1.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Carmen Sandiego Captured.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Carmen Sandiego Captured.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:The end of Case 5.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:The end of Case 5.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Jailbreak Sequence in Great Chase Through Time.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Jailbreak Sequence in Great Chase Through Time.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:30, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Vile Thieves in ACME Agent Handout.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Vile Thieves in ACME Agent Handout.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:30, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Case 19 in Great Chase Through Time.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Case 19 in Great Chase Through Time.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:30, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Carmen Note complete and Time Cuffs Activated.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Carmen Note complete and Time Cuffs Activated.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:31, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Carmen Sandiego cases.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Carmen Sandiego cases.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:31, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Chronopedia map.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Chronopedia map.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:31, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Rock Solid in Case 10.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Rock Solid in Case 10.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:32, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Great Chase Through Time logo.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Great Chase Through Time logo.gif. 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:33, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Chronopedia.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Chronopedia.gif. 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:33, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Great Chase Through Time timeline.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Great Chase Through Time timeline.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:33, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Carmen Sandiego Time Tunnel.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Carmen Sandiego Time Tunnel.gif. 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:34, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Carmen Sandiego Roman.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Carmen Sandiego Roman.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:34, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Time Tunnel Carmen Sandiego.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Time Tunnel Carmen Sandiego.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:34, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Where in Time icon.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Where in Time icon.png. 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Your Turn!
User:Coin945/The Elimination Game: WikiMedia §h₳un  9∞76   21:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Archiving
Thank you for adding some more TAFI's to the schedule. When you do that, please remember to archive the closed nominations on the appropriate page. For this month, it would be here. Regards, Automatic Strikeout  ( T  •  C) 02:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Carmen Sandiego games.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Carmen Sandiego games.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:52, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Jumping to conclusions for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jumping to conclusions 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/Jumping to conclusions 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 template from the top of the article. -- Trevj (talk) 15:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * As I said: Go! &#9786; Uncle G (talk) 10:24, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Zambrna or Zambrano
You seem to be interested in the Zambrana(o) History. Here is my wiki on all the infromation i have gathered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Itzcoatzin/sandbox

I am currently working on getting data from Templar orders in spain.

Zambrano from Flanders; Zambrano and Brask or Zambranok. May have been killed in the French king trials of the templars

Zambrano from Italy Zambrano From south america or nueva granada.

And i am currently looking for the Zambrana family relative that formed the Zambraos that travel to flanders. Ochoa zambraos may be related to a zambrana child that had no rigth to the Lord title.

Jose Luis Zambrano De Santiago (talk)

Jose Luis Zambrano De Santiago (talk) 02:10, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Carmen Sandiego's Great Chase Through Time
Hi, Coin945, I'm beginning the copy-edit you requested to the above article at the GOCE Request page. Please feel free to contact me, or to correct or revert my changes if I'm doing something I shouldn't. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit concerned about reference 31, which is described as "Personal communication with David Saccheri on 9 November 2012". This would be original research under WP's verifiability requirements, so unless you can provide the same info from a published source, it'll have to come out. Also, you can change the problem image licenses to Fair Use; that way they can remain in the article. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:11, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello. Firstly, let me just say that I am very grateful that you have decided to copyedit the article that i requested. I appreciate that you gave it a shot, despite thinking that it needed too much work for a copyedit to be useful. The first thing that catches my attention is the amount of content that has been outright deleted. For example, about half of what was in the introductory paragraph has now been deleted (i know its only supposed to give an overview of the rest of the article, but the info itself didn't seem bad to me at all). The many paragraphs listing members of the crew (which understandably got deleted) was not replaced with a mention of the most important figures. What is left - especially in the gameplay section - is rather hard to follow and would be confusing to a reader. As someone who invested a lot of their time and energy into getting this article up to a standard I was happy with, I would appreciate some form of justification for the choices you have made. Yes.. the pangs of personal attachment are quite prominent when seeing your edits... even thoguh I know i should remain impartial. I am just dubious as to whether your edits are in fact improvements or not.--Coin945 (talk) 13:14, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * In regard to the personal communicaiton issue, I had hit a crossroad, when I had gotten all the info I could by using free sources, and while waiting to pass various paywalls I sought contacts from the production team to find out more. Saccheri very graciously gave up his time and gave me some very interesting information that I decided to include. I saw nothing wrong with it. The transcript of the conversation can be accessed via my facebook account (i used my facebook email address). Can I not simply 'print screen' the images and upload them somewhere to prove the conversations actually took place? It is obvious that I am not lying... and it would suck bigtime if we had to get rid of true info due to a minor technicality....--Coin945 (talk) 13:14, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for replying. I appreciate that you've taken the trouble to research the game, which is commendable in itself. Yes it would be sad to lose all that work from the article. Unfortunately, on Wikipedia original research isn't a minor technicality. Wikipedia doesn't publish original research; everything must be verifiable from reliable, published sources. If you wrote an article for (say) a games magazine, and it was published, we could then use it as a source, but we can't use Facebook as a reference because anyone can publish on Facebook and there are no editorial controls. It might be suitable if Saccheri is talking about himself (which would be off-topic), but not about the game.


 * There are guidelines on video game articles, and please bear in mind that Wikipedia isn't a video game guide. Finally, take a look at God of War II, a video game article that has achieved GA status, for an idea of what is expected at GA.


 * I deleted a huge amount of text because it either provided too much detail, didn't convey any information about the game or was off-topic. FA reviewers have very high standards; they want to see tightly-written, information-rich text that conveys all the important information about the subject, that is properly referenced and is interesting, and makes readers want to continue reading the article.


 * I do appreciate that you're probably quite young, and are fairly new to Wikipedia. Please don't feel discouraged by my apparent hacking away at the article; I'm trying to get the best out of the text and I hope you'll see an improved article by the time I'm finished. It won't be perfect but I'll do my best with what's there. I hope you'll continue contributing to the encyclopaedia. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:41, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi Coin, just a note to let you know I'm still working on this article. See my edit summaries over there for more details. Cheers, and compliments of the season to you. :-) Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:07, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Copy-edit done (though I might do some more clean-up); please feel free to contact me about any issues with the copy-edit. Good luck with your planned FA nomination. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:25, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Carmen Sandiego and her Crooks.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Carmen Sandiego and her Crooks.gif. 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:23, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Sacagawea in Great Chase Through Time.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Sacagawea in Great Chase Through Time.gif. 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:24, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bongee Bear and the Kingdom of Rhythm


The article Bongee Bear and the Kingdom of Rhythm has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * notability concerns, whilst not a hoax I'm not convinced it passes WP:NFILMS as even though there's a wealth of mentions on reliable sites they're little more than either marketing guff or part of an automated index, there's no critical appraisal of it and IMDb even lacks an entry for it.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. tutterMouse (talk) 15:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

"Anal"
If you're unsure if something is a personal attack or not, it probably is, but I recommend the real-life interaction test. If you were, say, at a store or restaurant talking to the person working there and they creased their brow suddenly and said "Why are you being so anal?" would you consider this an acceptable statement? What about in a business meeting, or to a stranger on the street? Just because this is the internet and we can't see each others' faces does not mean that these statements do not pass through the same filters of acceptable social behavior when being read. So yeah, that was an inappropriate comment, and definitely not helpful for the discussion. siafu (talk) 16:29, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I apologise, and I am sorry that you took such offense. I used "anal" as short for anal retentiveness (in a lighthearted manner, hence the whole "excuse my french" thing) - merely a term used to describe a type of behaviour, or outlook, not meant to be hurtful at all. Perhaps you saw the word "anal" and took offense to its other meaning (in the same way that people became upset at that featured article for the South Park episode that had the word "Poo" in it, without taking context into account). I don't know. All I can say is that at that point in time, I wanted to describe the (in my view) overly strict terms and conditions you had placed on the Wikipedia misconceptions when, as had been pointed out, it seemed that the sources already in the article had not gone through such a grueling (understandably so) process. I was led to believe that you were very thorough and had a great attention to detail, which can only be commended. You are right. On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog, and while that is certainly an acceptable word in my vocabulary (and seemingly the perfect word to use in that context), it may very well get lost in translation. Again, I apologise for upsetting you, and I sincerely hope we can move past this unfortunate faux pas.... :)--Coin945 (talk) 12:09, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of awards and nominations articles


The article List of awards and nominations articles has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Not needed, redundant to categories such as Category:Lists of awards by musician. Not linked from anywhere and probably won't be.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:57, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Playlist (album series) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Playlist (album series) 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/Playlist (album series) & 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 template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:02, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of extreme points lists


The article List of extreme points lists has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Using article space as a category. Redundant, unneeded.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:04, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of bibliography lists


The article List of bibliography lists has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Using article space as a category. Redundant, unneeded.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:04, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of criticism and critique articles


The article List of criticism and critique articles has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Using article space as a category. Redundant, unneeded.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:05, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of controversy articles


The article List of controversy articles has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Using article space as a category. Topic is far too broad for a list to serve any purpose. Woefully incomplete.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:06, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of comparison articles


The article List of comparison articles has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Using article space as a category. Redundant, unneeded.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:06, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of streaming websites


The article List of streaming websites has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Incomplete, redlinky list. No really clear definition here.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:07, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of fastest-selling products


The article List of fastest-selling products has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * just a list of trivia, can potentially include anything. no clear critieria for inclusion

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:08, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of criticism and critique articles for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of criticism and critique articles 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/List of criticism and critique articles & 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 template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:08, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Lists
Why do you want all your lists AFDed instead of prodded? If you say something like that on a talk page, you really should elaborate. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 02:39, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of fastest-selling products for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of fastest-selling products 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/List of fastest-selling products 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 template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:00, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of bibliography lists for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of bibliography lists 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/List of bibliography lists 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 template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 08:41, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of controversy articles for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of controversy articles 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/List of controversy articles 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 template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 08:41, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of comparison articles for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of comparison articles 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/List of comparison articles 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 template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 08:42, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of streaming websites for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of streaming websites 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/List of streaming websites 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 template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 08:43, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of awards and nominations articles for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of awards and nominations articles 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/List of awards and nominations articles 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 template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 08:44, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of media sharing websites


The article List of media sharing websites has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Completely unused dab, no incoming links, little traffic. "Media sharing" does not have an article, so this is an unlikely search term.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 02:49, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * The Day Before You Came (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to A House Divided


 * The Girl with the Golden Hair (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to I Wonder

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of List of fastest-selling products for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of fastest-selling products 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/List of fastest-selling products (2nd nomination) 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 template from the top of the article. Jucchan (talk) 03:34, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I have withdrawn the AfD, I will wait until the end of January before making another one if I think that it still needs to be deleted. Sorry for the confusion, and I hope that you are not offended in any way. Jucchan (talk) 07:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Working out the details at Today's article for improvement
The RFC for TAFI is nearing it's conclusion, and it's time to hammer out the details over at the project's talk page. There are several details of the project that would do well with wider input and participation, such as the article nomination and selection process, the amount and type of articles displayed, the implementation on the main page and other things. I would like to invite you to comment there if you continue to be interested in TAFI's development. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 02:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Merging Role-playing and Make believe
Do you have any particular reasons why the articles should be merged? You'll want to start a discussion on the destination article's Talk page. See Merging or Help:Merging for more on completing the merge proposal. Woodroar (talk) 01:56, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Ahh sorry. Was so caught up in adding the templates that I forgot to give my rationale. Silly me... *facepalm*.--Coin945 (talk) 04:19, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Catchiness (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hook


 * Melody Time (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Thomas Scott

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Second Hand White Baby Grand, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Don't Forget Me (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

ABBA edits by IP
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. De728631 (talk) 12:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Main Theme Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego .ogg)
Thanks for uploading File:Main Theme Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego .ogg. 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:14, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Poles of astronomical bodies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Magnetic pole (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Your changes to the table at TAFI - Nominations
Hello,

I just saw your recent 40-50 nominations at the tables, and your changes to the table format. And I think they're great!!! Brilliant thinking!!! :)

I am a little short on time currently and so I cant do it myself, but I am hoping you would continue the tables conversion and extend it to all the nominations at the nomination as well as Holding Areas. Once again, well done and keep it up !!! :D

And yes. You did nominate way more articles than we could currently think of handling. But once again, I think they're great. Some really excellent nominations there. (Am still reading through them to figure how many to support!)

Cheers, TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:52, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thankyou so much for your kind words. As I said in one of the edit summaries, I did get a little carried away, and by a little I mean a lot :P. I do think that all (or at least most) or my suggestions are good ones, so fingers crossed that I didn't screw things up too majorly. I do think that due to the huge influx of nominations, the amount of time articles stay on the page before being archived should be extended. I read the discussions on the talk page, and decided to be bold and make a change that I figured would make everyone's lives a heck of a lot easier. I'm glad to see you appreciate my work. :). Sadly, because you have to click thoruhg like 3 screens to get to the daily views, it's gonna be a bit of a bitch to complete the tables, but I'll see what I can do.--Coin945 (talk) 01:27, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

TAFI
Hello Coin945: Thanks for all of your contributions to Today's article for improvement. One thing I noticed, when !voting in the table, be sure to begin entries on a new line with a "#" sign and sign them with 4 tildes in the appropriate area for the entry:  #~ . This retains the numeric formatting in the tables. I went through the tables and corrected entries where the numeric formatting was broken. Thanks for your consideration, and happy editing! Northamerica1000(talk) 01:20, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Thankyou. I only realised I had done that after checking the edit differences just now. Sorry about that.... :/--Coin945 (talk) 01:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Revising the nominations process at Today's article for improvement
I'm seeking wider input on a proposed redesign of the nomination process over at TAFI. The current method could benefit from some streamlining and usability tweaks. If you feel so inclined, I'd like to hear your opinion on the matter. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 23:03, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Nominating at TAFI
Hello,

Per this section on the TAFI talk page, I think we have a mutual abstention from the nomination process to allow only our newer members to nominate article. May I request you to do the same, and simply keep track of the names of the articles you'll like to see here, so you can nominate them all when we find the need to do so?

Thanks and cheers, TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:21, 1 February 2013 (UTC) (TB please!)


 * Cheers. Well, I guess I'll move the results of my latest relapse into the talk page. :) (for the record, I didn't enpext the newbies to actually be nominating and voting. I thought they were just editing...)--Coin945 (talk) 15:40, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * (ec) Umm, what? Did you fail to see my talk page section here? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:46, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I read your comment above only after making the edit. Would you like me to move it to the talk page?--Coin945 (talk) 16:01, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Naah. Let those noms remain - Just lets not nominate any more unless absolutely necessary TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)


 * By newbies, we mean all those other than the 6 currently involved. And I do expect at least 2-3 nominations from real newbies. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:46, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Awesome. :) Well then we'll need to make the nomination process easier, I'll need to stop nominating, and then we can have a functional and successful TAFI!--Coin945 (talk) 16:01, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes indeed. Any ideas on how to do all that? Do comment on the talk page with your opinions on them. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:26, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Although its usually not considered good practise, I have boldly edited your new section at Jimbo's talk page so that we might not want to be discouraging to other new members. Please feel free to revert/change anything that you feel was unjust. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:17, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Also, do you mind moving your nominations on the talk to your userspace? We are all keeping our separate lists by ourselves :) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:21, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh... didn't realise that would be a problem haha :). I just figured starting a list to ensourage others to put their nominations there (rather than clog up the nominations section) was a good idea. I'll certainly do it.--Coin945 (talk) 17:22, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Ideas for TAFI

 * Crown (headgear)
 * Headstone
 * Hourglass
 * Human heart
 * Christogram
 * Angel of Grief
 * Arch
 * Ivy
 * Oil lamp <-- man is this article a mess...
 * Bay Laurel
 * Lily
 * Olive branch
 * Peafowl <-- terrible article for one viewed daily around 7000-8000 times..
 * Poppy
 * Cross <-- excluding the list, this article is a basic stub on what should be a comprehensive topic.
 * Skeleton
 * Torch
 * Trunk (botany)
 * Tzedakah
 * Salix babylonica (Weeping Willow)
 * Star system (filmmaking) <-- this really intrigues me. It's essentially about how filmmakers in the early days of cinema created brand loyalty to actors/companies/directors etc.--Coin945 (talk) 05:03, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Gödel, Escher, Bach
 * Incoherents

Yeah that's undue weight
Massively undue weight, and it would be even more so if it had its own article. I dispise the show, but that is way, way too much. Especially as a lot of the sources are not exactly high quality. I'd say the section is already sufficient in size, though there may be some scope to change it around. The Guardian, Time and Ortved can stay, but no more than a brief quote from each. And no quote boxes, unless you can balance it with a positive review. Gran2 17:31, 2 February 2013 (UTC)


 * That was only the beginning. I didn't want to add even more information as it seemed to be getting a bit too large. I actually truly love this show. It's just the specific sources I chose had less than flattering things to say. But I've got about 10 tabs open at the moment full of good, bad, and other things to say about the show's changing quality over the years (or indeed if there has been any change at all). It's really late over here, so I'll go to bed now, and tomorrow I'll get to work on the spinoff article. Perhaps you can have a look through what I've added and see how much should stay here, and how much should be reserved for the spinoff. :)--Coin945 (talk) 18:04, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * For example, I have the John Ortveid book with me, which has a wealth of quotes from Simpsons-related people about the show being as good as it ever was, but I skimmed over them to get to the text by the author himself. I'll add those other quotes into the article when I get the chance.--Coin945 (talk) 18:09, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * P.S. Yes.. I thiink maybe one or two were of dubious quality, but I knew it was a case of 'this is backed up in many sources and I just happened to pick a dud one' so I kept them there anyways, to be swapped later.--Coin945 (talk) 18:06, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * As said, I don't think a separate article is really justified, although I'd fully support re-writing and expanding the section a bit given that it is a bit stale. The Time, Guardian stuff is all fine (although not at the length it's quoted), but stuff like Dead Homers (as much as I would dearly love to include it), fails notability standards, unless you can find a reliable media source which mentions it. Anyway, I'll let you finish the job tomorrow before further discussion. Gran2 18:13, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thankyou for your patience. Rather than talking theoretically about it, atm I'm putting together the article. The references are just bare links because I've got a lot and would rather do all that messiness later. I'm working in Microsoft Word, so will post it in a sandbox soon. I really think this has a lot of potential. It is a majorly huge aspect of The Simpsons, and has been dominating the public discourse surrounding the show ever since the supposed end of its golden age (that's one of my sections - 'when' did it end).--Coin945 (talk) 05:52, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I think there's some mileage here, but perhaps (although it would be more work) a broader 'Critical reception of The Simpsons' article? This could encompass the positive reaction of the early and the negative reaction towards the latter, without being overly focused on the issue of decline. Gran2 13:50, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * User:Coin945/The Simpsons quality. Not sure if that's the best title for it just yet, and also accept that there's a lot more to be done (a few sections need fleshing out, a few subsections need to be jiggled about etc.), but *dusts hands* I think I've done a pretty good job for such a short amount of time. I totally understand what you've said, and agree that a Critical reception article would be awesome too (and this can be the basis for that article if we decide to can it), but I think it is worth a looking over by you and others in The Simpsons Wikiproject. I'd love to help you guys get to work on the Cultural impact/Critical receptions ones. :)--Coin945 (talk) 16:53, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Properties of metalloids
Have drafted something along these lines. How does it look? Sandbh (talk) 12:43, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Good feedback; have posted a response. Thank you, Sandbh (talk) 07:57, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
 * More of the same! Might be good to go now. Sandbh (talk) 03:01, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Merge hypersalivation/drooling
fyi I highlighted this proposal on WT:MED, hopefully will get consensus... Lesion ( talk ) 12:25, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hieroglyph, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hieros (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:38, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

About TAFI
Hello,

I think that things are going nowhere for the TAFI, as far as the main page is concerned. In my opinion, the most viable way to solve this situation is to simply start an RFC on the main page talk to finalize all the little details (Where do we put it, How many lines, How do we balance it, etc etc). Link this rfc from CENT and the watchlist, and village pump, and jimbo's talk page. Get others to comment on it, and have a decision taken. This seems to be the best and in this case, possibly the only way, to actually implement it on the main page anytime soon. What do you think?

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:02, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Zombie Simpsons3.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Zombie Simpsons3.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Zombie Simpsons1.gif)
Thanks for uploading File:Zombie Simpsons1.gif. 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:17, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Zombie Simpsons2.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Zombie Simpsons2.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:18, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

TAFI Holding area
Hello fellow TAFI member. Just a friendly note, when adding new nominations to the TAFI holding area, please post new entries at the end of the lists, so that older entries are scheduled first, and newer entries are scheduled after the older ones. I've added instructions on the page for further information. Thanks! Northamerica1000(talk) 09:19, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Carmen Sandiego games2.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Carmen Sandiego games2.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:45, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Chase Devineaux.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Chase Devineaux.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:47, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Mais où se Cache Carmen Sandiego.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Mais où se Cache Carmen Sandiego.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:49, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Math Detective cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Math Detective cover.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:50, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego? 1997 Cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego? 1997 Cover.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:51, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Treasures of Knowledge cover.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Treasures of Knowledge cover.gif. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Junior Detective cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Junior Detective cover.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Where in the World DeluxeTrailer.ogv
Thanks for uploading File:Where in the World DeluxeTrailer.ogv. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Where in the USA Deluxe gameplay.ogv
Thanks for uploading File:Where in the USA Deluxe gameplay.ogv. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:53, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Where in USA cover Broderbund.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Where in USA cover Broderbund.gif. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:53, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:New Carmen Adventure.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:New Carmen Adventure.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:01, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Where in America's Past.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Where in America's Past.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:25, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Quality issue of The Simpsons for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Quality issue of The Simpsons 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/Quality issue of The Simpsons 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 template from the top of the article. MichiganCharms (talk) 19:46, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

The Simpsons
Hello

I decided to reply here, because the discussion on Articles for deletion/Quality issue of The Simpsons started to divert from the original discussion.

I personally like overview articles like the ones you suggested, which is why I got History of The Simpsons up to GA standards. I do believe that The Simpsons deserve articles like the ones you mentioned. This however takes a lot of time, which I quite simply don't have much of these days. My last project was getting Media in The Simpsons up to GA standards. It still needs a lot of work, but it is way better than the mess it used to be. I have collected material for Politics in The Simpsons in User:Maitch/draft3 and Religion in The Simpsons in User:Maitch/draft4. I think it is a bad idea to merge the theme articles - there is just too much ground to cover. You could do an entire article on homosexuality in The Simpsons alone.

I feel bad that you did all that work on the Quality article, just to have it deleted. You do have some interesting tidbits, but you need to rework it into another form. I would advise you to save your article in a sandbox, like my drafts and then try and see if you can use it elsewhere.

I don't think I am much help anymore, since I am semi-retired. I have written up to 100 Simpsons articles, so I have done my fair share. I can offer you some advice from time to time. My main advice is that spend more time finding reliable sources WP:RS. You have way two many unreliable sources in your article.

What kind of project do you want to do most? --Maitch (talk) 19:50, 25 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I appreciate all the hard work you've done for Wikipedia. Many Simpsons fans thank you. I don't really know what project I'd like to do. I think information from Quality could be used for articles ranging from critical reception to voice acting to writing. TBH I've kinda lost interest in the whole thing now. With the whole tackling the daunting task on my own to the AFD discussion which was more about deleting the article than objectively looking at the idea behind the creation of the article and seeing possible future directions, I'm kinda bored now. Plus, Wikipedia these days seems to only want B class articles as soon as they're created, so while I'd love to start branch articles on all those other things, you know they'd all be deleted for not having enough information in order to justify their existence... even thoguh the whole point of Wikipedia is to build on small things. You say you don't have enough time to work on such articles? Well I'm in the same boat. As I said, I'd be willing to start various articles for others to build on (the whole point of crowdsourcing), but we'll see how we go.--Coin945 (talk) 08:32, 26 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I totally get that you lost interest. These days I see many people who are trying to "fix" Wikipedia by deleting stuff, rather than doing the hard work of sorting out the stuff that works and build upon that.
 * Anyway, I think a better stategy for you is to pick a topic of smaller scope, collect enough reliable sources to justify the existence of an article while working on it in your own personal sandbox and then create the article when it is ready. Alternatively, you could do some work on the articles that already exists. Non-English versions of The Simpsons could really use an upgrade, but it has survived several deletion reviews. List of The Simpsons writers could use some text to go along with the list. Media in The Simpsons, Politics in The Simpsons, and Religion in The Simpsons still needs lots of work. Also, I had the idea of turning Products produced from The Simpsons into an article about "Commercialism on The Simpsons". Maybe we could collaborate on something, but I only think I can put in a few hours work per week. --Maitch (talk) 14:07, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 31
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited God Help the Outcasts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page For the First Time (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:The Big Ben Burglary trailer.oga
Thanks for uploading File:The Big Ben Burglary trailer.oga. 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 created 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:16, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Where in the World Facebook.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Where in the World Facebook.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 created 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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:17, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Where in the World Facebook.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Where in the World Facebook.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 12:40, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Need input on Original songs in Smash
Caringtype1 and I are having a disagreement about the songs getting their own pages since I went ahead and did several Season 2 songs. We need you to weigh in since you've been part of the discussion already. Caring wants only certain songs to get their own pages and I thought we had agreed to make the effort to make pages and then defend notability. See the Song pages section. Thanks Ducold (talk) 21:19, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Have a look at these
User:TheOriginalSoni/Snappy. Tell me what you think of them, and how they can be best used. Cheers, TheOriginalSoni (talk) 13:45, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I replied at the talk page for Snappy.
 * Also, there is a genuine imbalance that occurs whenever 2 lines are used, and not 1. So we really need a wide enough consensus before we can try expansion to 2 lines. We just need to keep our heads down, and wait. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:30, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Law of the sea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:46, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

TAFI
I've realised that getting all emotional or involved or psyched up about it from my side is not going to help the overall discussion. It tended to actually sidetrack it. So what i do now is to simply not participate in the discussion unless I have some important point to say, or an opinion to convey (See my last three replies there). I found out that that was good for both me, and the discussion. Maybe you should consider doing the same?

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 10:58, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Relief (emotion), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Distress (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Good game app.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Good game app.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Good Game cast and crew 2012.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Good Game cast and crew 2012.jpeg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:06, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Good Game Lizzie Awards.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Good Game Lizzie Awards.jpeg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:06, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Good Game Roffle Cup 2012.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Good Game Roffle Cup 2012.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Good Game set.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Good Game set.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Hex playing a game for Good Game.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Hex playing a game for Good Game.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Bajo & Hex Good Game.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Bajo & Hex Good Game.JPG. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:06, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Missing Junglist.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Missing Junglist.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

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 "Click here to 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. czar  &middot;   &middot;  10:27, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Your nominations at WP:TAFINOM
Just a heads up that you may want to reformat your !votes at WP:TAFINOM to be listed in bold. The bot that automatically moves successful entries to the project's holding area may not read your comments if they're not in bold. Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 14:18, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=555668556 your edit] to Clue (video game) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].

Proposal at TAFI talk
A discussion that may interest you is occurring at Wikiproject TAFI's talk page at Proposal: use Theo's Little Bot to automate the schedule and queue. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:03, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Article notability notification
Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote, Where in Space Is Carmen Sandiego?, has been recently tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources:. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 01:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating History of Jerusalem during the Crusader period, Coin945!

Wikipedia editor Ad Orientem just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Just finished NAP on this outstanding article. A pleasant change from I too often tend to see."

To reply, leave a comment on Ad Orientem's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Orphaned non-free media (File:Good Game Lizzie Awards.jpeg)
Thanks for uploading File:Good Game Lizzie Awards.jpeg. 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 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 05:17, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Bajo & Hex Good Game.JPG)
Thanks for uploading File:Bajo & Hex Good Game.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 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 05:17, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=559911660 your edit] to Drinking culture may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:43, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * * [Sculling]

Horrible Histories (2009 TV series)
Hi Coin, I notice that you are re-adding much that I took out though I gave reasons in the edit summary and are explored on the article talk page. Lines like


 * 'Jenner has stated that he is "genuinely gutted" when the show gets a fact wrong, because the workers have invested so much time and energy into a show that they are so proud of. '

are too close to the primary material and to embedded in single production staff opinions. The article already covers in detail the number of errors made on the shows and that crew don't like it. I think the article needs to pull towards a more encyclopaedic tone and sound less like a glowing CBBC infopage. A reader who hates the show should be able to read the article and find it useful, seeing the simple facts reflected. I would prefer that you discuss re-adds on the article talk page, rather than just adding content straight back in. Span (talk) 19:12, 17 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Coin, editors are walking away from the HH article in frustration with your approach. You are not addressing any of the issues raised on the article talk page and getting perilously close to non-consensus disruptive editing. Nobody likes to be ignored. Span (talk) 19:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Span, To be fair, I didn't think there were *that* many editors editing the article to begin with. Just us 3, i'd have thought. And as I previously mentioned, i wasn't intentionally ignoring anybody. I like to edit articles undistracted, so i deliberately didnt check my notifications or the talk page or anything. it wasn't a conscious decision. i was just too busy doing other things. I agree with you in regard to having "a more encyclopaedic tone" completely. I find it extremely difficult to find the distinction betwen that and what's there at the moment. It would help me greatly if you guys could help me out. I seems like rather than actually editing the article, the poeple who have identified the errors are instead asking me to fix them.. which seems rather counterintuitive. Yes, i made mistakes, butt hat's what's so great about wikipedia. Others can identify and fix them. There were a couple of "well you cocked up so you fix it" type comments in the talk page, which was rather disconcerting... I'll see what the situation is like now. The reason i restored that info was just in case there was anything that would be useful in the completed article. I must confess I'm a tad hoarder-ish.. which probably isn't the best trait to have when it comes to wikipedia articles. Nevertheless, now that the article is 'complete', ti can be cut back and changed until the featured article lurking around in there somewhere comes to light.--Coin945 (talk) 13:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I understand that it felt like we were asking you to fix errors. In your extreme focus you undid all the copy editing I did, without comment. The work had taken me the best part of the afternoon. There seemed little point in doing it all again and more if changes were just reverted. I am not suggesting you are incompetent (as you wrote on the article talk page). Your enthusiasm and commitment to Wikipedia are to be celebrated. But we are a fundamentally collaborative project - all placed on an equal footing. It's a team effort. Wikia has much less rigid rules and maybe a better to place to paste everything, if you are worried about information being lost. It may also be that detailed WP articles may be written on specific HH aspects. I'd like to hear from Coco on her thoughts about how to progress. Edit summaries really are very helpful for other editors to understand the reasons for changes. More than one editor working on the article at precisely the same time just seems to make editing hard for everyone. Span (talk) 18:26, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

 A pot of English breakfast tea, for a nice cup of tea and a sit down. (I recommend the biscuits).

Category:Drink WikiLove templates


 * For what it's worth, I didn't actually revert your edits. Your copyediting was much appreciate. All I did was bring back a whole paragraph or two. Paragraphs that as far as im aware you didnt copyedit at all, and merely deleted whole. I remember bringing back a chunk for the Anglo-centric section; the information suddenly had greater importance within the context of the article. So reinstating them didnt seem like that big of a deal. If I had reverted your entire useful edit, then i can see how that would have been a much bigger problem. This probably got lost in translation due to (surprise surprise) the lack of edit summaries. Thankyou for the virtual tea and biscuits though :)--Coin945 (talk) 06:18, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks much for Fuck help
Thank you for your help with Fuck (film), much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 23:47, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Haha it was a tiny typo. But thankyou anyways, Cirt. It must be tedious reading over the same article again and again. It's only natural for one or two to slip through the cracks. Fantastic article by the way. Never even heard of this documentary before. Now I can't wait to watch it (...despite its average reviews.. :P).--Coin945 (talk) 09:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Horrible Histories (2009 TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Freeview (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:36, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Keep on Rockin'


The article Keep on Rockin' has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable film

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:32, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

quick follow up on TAFI
Hi Coin!!

It's so awesome that you're adding TAFI social media suggestions. I have to admit to laughing my butt off over the Spelling Bee one :) Can you address Tilman's comment here on the Java Man TAFI? https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Social_media/Calendar#July_15

I look forward to seeing more of your witticisms. Matthew (WMF) 23:53, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

This week's articles for improvement - 22 July 2013 to 28 July 2013
posted by Northamerica1000(talk) 09:53, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I've added an opt-in section for those interested in receiving TAFI notifications on the project's main page, located here. Those that don't opt-in won't receive this message again. Also, a revised notification template has been created, located at Template:TAFI weekly selections notice. Northamerica1000(talk) 05:16, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Requested Articles
Hi! I am trying to reinvigorate WikiProject Requested Articles, which, if I get enough pointers that there is some interest, I will re-design, with a design similar to WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors, involving drives, to decrease the number of articles listed in the various subpages, and blue link blitzes, involving editors removing all created pages. I am planning, with sufficient interest, to make requested articles 'stricter', i.e. you have to provide two reliable sources, and write a short note explaining why the requested article is notable. There would be a reward system, involving adapted barnstars, similar to the Guild of Copy Editors have here and here. If you have any questions about my aim, or want to indicate that you would sign up to the WikiProject, please say so on my talk page. Thanks! Mat ty. 007 15:53, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Talking with your mouth full
Hello, Coin945. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Talking with your mouth full, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:


 * 1) edit the page
 * 2) remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. TheLongTone (talk) 14:15, 30 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Send it to AFD instead TheLongTone.--Coin945 (talk) 14:30, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Requested Articles update
Hi, you've told me that you're interested in WikiProject Requested Articles, and I thought you may want an update: today, I created all the subpages of WikiProject RA that didn't exist, but were in my heading template, and I put in a new colour design. I hope you like it, feel free to have a look through the pages. I am asking at the Village Pump on what to do with the current Requested Articles. I hope you like the new design. If you have any questions, just ask! Thanks, Mat  ty. 007 14:40, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Goldenseal
Thank you for your input on the Talk:Poaching page. I have already tried, very little I admit, to interact with BhagyaMani and am running into, it is in this book so that is how it is syndrome. I have run into this sort of dogmatic adherence to the cause before. The lede, I think you call it uses an very esoteric non-standard definition and the Acts of poaching section is factually incorrect even by the references provided. I appreciate your comments but what I really need help with is getting a balanced article that is not skewed by only including references to the exclusion of the generally used and applied meaning. I am collecting references and will continue editing when I think I have enough. I am beginning to develop a flow so hopefully the my frustration will ebb.

Thanks again for your concern. Economic Refugee (talk) 19:32, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Brilliant minds
I was archiving all those same TAFI entries at the same time. I'll be putting a bunch of noms down that I've been saving up. Or I could be confused as to what just happened... nonetheless, I'll be adding some noms. -- Nick Penguin ( contribs ) 01:19, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

TAFI error
Since you signed twice in one section, I think you may have meant to sign the section above. Please correct yourself.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:40, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Daily hits wrong at TAFI
All your Philosophy and Religion nominations at WP:TAFI seemed to copy the daily hits number from Religious music above them. This means two things. One you copied the wrong daily hits numbers. Two, you added new nominees below old ones instead of above them.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:18, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Reply to "where we go from here" comment
The Signpost is typically published sometime between Wednesday and Friday. I'll finish the Signpost article later today. We let the responses to each question stand for themselves. There will be an introduction, a news sidebar, some pictures (if available), and a teaser at the end hinting at next week's article. –Mabeenot (talk) 14:58, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
Hi Coin945,

Thanks for your very kind mention of my efforts in The Signpost. I haven't abandoned TAFI, I have just been consumed recently by other projects and Chapter work. I agree that it is great to have articles that need improving pre-identified. (Although there is no shortage of work to do in WP!) Keep up the good work - I will contribute when I can. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 09:37, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool update
Hey Coin945. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Crazy edit
What is going on with this edit?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:41, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Whoah.. no clue. Maybe I accidentally edited an old revision of the page. Only the comment on the zodiac sign needs to remain.--Coin945 (talk) 01:44, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

The new black
Hello. Following up on the discussion in Articles for deletion/Mother of all, you might be interested in my deletion nomination for The new black. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, sorry
My apologies, I was wrong footed here. The Banner talk 16:55, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Intermezzo No. 1, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page So Long (song) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:02, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
What's up with the poem? Care to comment about the actual nomination...? Northamerica1000(talk) 08:20, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages
 * -- 19:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Persistence of Vision (documentary), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Williams (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of The Santa Experience for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Santa Experience 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/The Santa Experience 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.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 01:11, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=577985467 your edit] to Bloodaxe may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:35, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * * B'hrian Bloodaxe, a Discworld character

Thank you response
Thank you for your kind comment on the Social Cue article talk page. My classmate and I will be adding more to this article as part of a assignment/project for our college psychology class. Once again, thank you for your kind words and helpful advice. L.Warren18 (talk) 18:36, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Requested articles revamp
Hi, you told me that you were interested in requested articles, so I thought that I should let you know that there is a proposal to use a bot, and make it a lot easier to request articles (we would need some clean up of existing categories if it worked). I thought that you may be interested to hear, and perhaps comment on the discussion there. Thanks, Mat  ty. 007 19:41, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Long Point State Park
I closed this early. Bearian (talk) 20:19, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give The Liquidator (1965 film) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into The Liquidator (film). This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 06:56, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * The Nostalgia Chick (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Spin-off and Picard


 * The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996 film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Gypsy

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Northamerica1000(talk) 13:06, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Today's articles for improvement/Nominated articles
Hello Coin945: A request to please sign your new entries at the TAFI nom page. It makes it easier when people can view who made the post. Thank you in advance for your consideration, and happy holidays. Northamerica1000(talk) 19:37, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Prod of Ɛ̃
Do you mind if this is deleted? Bearian (talk) 17:56, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I think it probably deserves an article, but if it gets deleted I won't be too phased by it.--Coin945 (talk) 20:36, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Horribly Famous, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Darwin and Newton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Comment/Editing
Hi I am a student editing you're social cue wikki article and I am doing so as part of a class assignment. Therefore, I was wondering if you could not edit or repost your edits/comments until next week because my professor needs to see what I, along with my partner, wrote on this page. Thank you L.Warren18 (talk) 22:55, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Whoops.. genuinely forgot about hat. Sorry. Good luck with the assignment. :D--Coin945 (talk) 08:40, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Your recent HH edits in my sandbox
Hello! I just noticed that you've been making some edits to the text of the Horrible Histories article rewrite in my sandbox. While I'm always happy to have your help, can I please ask that you restrict questions or suggestions for the moment to the talk page? This is my version of the article, not the mainspace version, and it is still very much a work in progress. Without knowledge of my intentions you can't effectively assist -- it's really confusing to (for example) return to a quote I'd been planning to move and discover that it's been replaced entirely! (Incidentally, the Blackadder quote in question was intended to summarize both the cleverness and the trivialization and the adult sensibility in one swoop. I'll see about making that a bit clearer).

Once I've posted this version in mainspace it will of course be open to all. I'm actually planning to ask all the article's concerned editors to read and comment before that happens. But until then it'd just be a lot easier if I work on it solo. Thanks for understanding, Shoebox 2   talk  01:16, 12 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I assume youre referring to my changing of the "one step above Monty Python" quote. I didnt really do anything else... besides leaving an edit comment about Grossology (without actually editing the article myself). For these things, I sincerely apologise. I'll leave you to it. You've done an extraordinary job. Massive kudos! :)--Coin945 (talk) 08:43, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and apologies if I sounded over-huffy -- I wasn't really, just a bit un-nerved. :) (And you were right about the 'grossology' thing, incidentally.) I really do appreciate all the effort you've put into finding and marking potential sources. To the extent that I'm wondering quite seriously if you've ever considered writing a more in-depth, analytical article or thesis on the show, using the Wiki article as the springboard rather than the end result? There are a lot of places on the Net that would be looking to publish such a piece, and I think it'd be a much more rewarding outlet for your obvious passion for and commitment to the subject. Shoebox 2   talk  20:52, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * "An artist knows he has achieved perfection, not when there is nothing left to add but when there is nothing left to take away". I'm quite happy to give you tonnes of links to save you time and energy and pull out some quotes I find interesting, knowing full well you may only take the odd word here and there. That's how copyediting works. But thankyou very much for your suggestion, and whether or not it is a shrewd way to stop me trying to help and use my talents more productively, I greatly appreciate the sentiment and will seriously consider it. I do have great pasisons in things - HH definitely being one of them - so having a creative outlet might be a good thing. In fact, I do have a Disney-themed blog to let out my other fangirl side. :)--Coin945 (talk) 21:06, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You'll find my HH method of editing articles is a disease. See the current Good Game - an Australian game review show - article. I have a fear of losing information lol.--Coin945 (talk) 21:19, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, I'm quite serious about you writing a more analytical article. The only serious suggestion I'd make re: your Wiki-editing style is that you collate your information on the article's talkpage as you've done here, or perhaps in your personal sandbox, and let other editors collaborate with you re: what's usable before adding anything (note this in action on, for instance, The Wrong Mans' talkpage). It's just as secure, and much less damaging to the article itself. Another thing that might help is to work on paragraphing, varying your sentence length and general style; I know it seems counterintuitive, but when confronted with a huge detailed wall o'text, the reader's instinct is to slide their eye right over it (if you're familiar with the meme, this is essentially "tl;dr" syndrome). :)
 * The really good news is that some of the article's other editors have now reviewed my sandbox draft and, besides a few constructive criticisms, have overall more than approved it (as per my talkpage). I haven't yet quite decided whether to actively pursue GA status, but in any case I'm very pleased. Thanks again for your help. Shoebox 2   talk  18:49, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thankyou for your contructive criticism. I'll take it all on board obviously. And it will no doubt help my essays for uni - as it requires essentially the same paraphrasing technique. I've been following the reviews of your draft by those two wiki-users, and totally agree with their comments. And you've done an amazing work further de-quotifying (i know that's not a word, but... :D) it. You mentioned you thought all that information about marketing and interactive content was not suitable for the article. I would have to disagree with you there - when all the sources are looked at as one entity, it seems to be a rather significant part of the TV show's success (at least worthy of a small paragraph) - but I guess I'll leave you to your judgements. I can take a hint, and your lack of using the bits and pieces on the talk page show you don't need them..although I cant help thinking many (like the info on the show's use as part of the school curriculum & the note that no laugh track is used) should still be incorporated. In any case, youve done a remarkable job.. and all that would really need to be done is a fix up of the infobox and a tidying of the awards/nominations list. One small thing: As I said in the article history, the image captions that i find are the most useful are those which explain the images' existence in the article, such that one can understand the context surrounding them without reading the prose; you removed these sorts of things when you edited the captions - something which I question. In any case, cant wait to keep watching you copyedit it - it's great to see what you've done with it. keep up the good work. :)--Coin945 (talk) 20:05, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Also, i'm a guy.--Coin945 (talk) 20:05, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

[De-indenting to continue the conversation comfortably] Ooops... as someone who is routinely mistaken for the wrong gender (male) online, please allow me to sincerely apologise for that stupid assumption. And again, to say thanks. I remain in awe of your devotion to the cause and have genuinely found it valuable throughout this process. Just... like I said, dial it back a little and get some perspective (and preferably consensus) before you leap, y'know? :)

Re: your ongoing concerns, I think we can compromise on leaving the marketing awards in the table for now, and adding perhaps a few more sentences to the existing paragraph. My concern is that it's not particularly notable in terms of marketing techniques, but I'll take another look at the sources to see if any of them do make reference to assisting the show's popularity.

The info you found re: the show's use in school curriculae -- except for one nice article which I was able to use to source a sentence under 'Historical content' -- appears to be mostly individual random anecdotes, which don't honestly add up to a lot in my view. When I was a kid, teachers routinely read us various books, showed us films and had us use both both in projects; it's not an uncommon thing, unless perhaps the show's creators were to release an official study guide or something.

As for the laugh track, it's a tiny detail that -- forgive me -- I can't for the life of me imagine would be important to the reader's understanding or appreciation of the series, esp. as it's not mentioned anywhere in the multitude of media commentaries I've read. I do however agree I may have been over-hasty in pruning the image captions down. Will check the style of image captions elsewhere on the Wiki and adjust accordingly.

One possibly-important thing I do still feel might be missing is the Jubilee mini-controversy... feel like it should rate at least a sentence or two somewhere, but I can't figure out exactly where, or how (esp. with the Broadcast Now article, the major source, behind a paywall). Might bring that up for discussion on the article talkpage once it's been transferred over and see what everyone else thinks. Anything else you feel is missing, of course you can do the same. Shoebox 2  talk  22:10, 14 December 2013 (UTC)


 * OK, had another review of the marketing interactive media and I'm sorry, but I just don't see it as notable in the context of the show itself. It's a marketing campaign as all TV shows have, involving online-based multimedia as most marketing campaigns do these days. An apparently successful and even award-winning campaign which is great, and I as noted can certainly add another sentence or two to that effect, but it's just not unusually innovative or otherwise very remarkable -- as demonstrated by the fact that 99% of your sources are primary, ie. the ad agency itself. Nobody else seems to have cared, to put it bluntly, so it's unlikely the reader will consider it essential either. :)


 * However, I will still leave the awards in the table as mentioned, and if you feel strongly about it, you can certainly bring it up on the article's talkpage in future. Shoebox 2   talk  00:21, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * One final addendum... just discovered the re-organizing of roles in the actors' infoboxes. Quite aside from your agreeing to avoid directly editing my sandbox text... yes, trust me, those are all recurring roles (OK, Boudicca's a bit iffy, since she only reappeared post-song in marketing trailers, but hey, it still counts as HH). I'm not going to get into how I know the details of nearly every regular-series sketch (it involves some time spent editing an HH review blog) but believe me, I know. :) Shoebox 2   talk  05:22, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

OK, that's it...
I have asked you very politely, a few times now, to stay out of my sandbox text while I work on the article draft. I am under the strong impression -- backed up by other editors - that this is not an unusual or unreasonable request; given that this is effectively my private Wikispace, and given that I have, out of deference to your obvious eagerness to help, allowed some technical assistance, including the uploading of images (a mistake, in retrospect).

Yet you keep ignoring my clearly-stated wishes. This repeated refusal to acknowledge reasonable boundaries is, quite frankly, starting to seriously un-nerve me.

Your excuses for doing so most recently are not valid. I had explicitly asked you not to make changes to text, and you had agreed; there is no grey area here. There is also no 'time-consuming' in Wikipedia, we're not operating to a deadline and this article draft is anyway due eventually to appear in mainspace. Saying that 'these are only suggestions' and I can 'revert them at any time' (which I have, incidentally) does not excuse your intrusion in the first place.

You've left several notes in the past confirming that you're perfectly OK with my not using your multiple sourcing and other suggestions -- which, along with the fact of their being almost wholly unsolicited, is why I did not bother making individual notes detailing my reasons why not -- however your recent behaviour suggests otherwise. I get the impression you're getting impatient with my not taking up what you see as good ideas, and that's fine. But implementing them anyway, in my private workspace, over my express wishes, is not fine. At all.

(For the record: the PopMatters blog is just that, a blog, un-fact-checked and therefore completely unreliable for sourcing anything except opinion. The 'Format' section deals with material that is wholly self-evident to anyone watching the show and thus does not need sourcing to begin with (WP:BLUE). Most of your other source/topic suggestions, besides the ones I've demonstrably taken, are likewise unreliable, unusable or un-needed.)

So. I've been reading your responses to other issues on the HH article talkpage and your behaviour in this case seems to perfectly fit a pattern of apologising, pleading your ignorance or error, charming as needed... then going ahead and doing exactly what you wanted to do, claiming it wasn't such a big deal anyway. Repeat process until other editor either gives up or gives in.

Well, sorry, not buying any of it anymore. And frankly no longer in much of a mood to deal with it politely, either, either here or -- eventually, I'm sure -- in the article's talkpage.

So. Consider this your third and final warning. I am delaying posting the article draft into mainspace until tomorrow (Monday morning my time) to give you a fair chance to see and acknowledge this message. Please don't bother with further apologies, explaining or justifications; just acknowledge. And understand that if I ever catch you intruding on my private workspace again, in any way shape or form, I will immediately start exploring options to report the matter to an administrator. Shoebox 2  talk  14:47, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I want you to know that this wasn't a case of deliberately disobeying your commands in order to annoy you or because I thought I was better than you or anything. Whether you agree with this or not, my edits were always for the sake of the article and to make your life easier. I suppose I just have a very different philosophy in regard to the way sandboxes are used. I run my Wikipedia experience with an all-hands-on-deck approach at all times; any extra input is always welcome and not met with caution at all. I understand that my further edits probably did cross that line (although I specifically told you all you had to do was revert the whole thing to cancel all my suggestions), but to be fair that first edit of the bunch was an attempt to fix up my earlier attempt to reorder the characters, which you had criticised before. I know you feel like you have claim of ownership over the article due to all the amazing work you put into it, and I should have probably waited until the article was up and running before editing it properly, so in that respect I was probably out of line. But as I said before, in my eyes, what I did was not rude at all, and similar things have been done many times both ways in the past with no problems whatsoever. There are people on Wikipedia from all walks of life with very different editing philosophies, and this time round mine was just a tad too far away from yours. I won't touch the articles in your sandbox again.--Coin945 (talk) 12:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * sigh* Thank you. However, one more time: I specifically asked you not to do something, you agreed, and then you went ahead and did it anyway. That's it. That's the entire problem here. You know, like in the real world, someone tells you politely and reasonably to stop doing something that annoys them, and if at all possible you stop, because that's just basic decent human behaviour? Without wasting 1200+ words explaining that you didn't think it was a problem, while subtly implying that it was all their fault for being annoyed? Like that.
 * Please consider this my last word, I won't be responding further to this discussion. Going forward, however, I might just point out that I've spent an entire week, full-time, cleaning up the results of your 'different Wikipedia editing philosophy' -- or 'disease', as you yourself described it to me -- and will be keeping the experience in mind for future reference. Shoebox 2  talk  14:30, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 18 December
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * On the Horrible Histories: Barmy Britain page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=586635272 your edit] caused an unnamed parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20Horrible Histories: Barmy Britain Ask for help])

Proposed deletion of Plague, Poverty and Prayer: A Horrid History with Terry Deary
Hello, Coin945. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Plague, Poverty and Prayer: A Horrid History with Terry Deary, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:


 * 1) edit the page
 * 2) remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:02, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Cites for HH song list
I noticed the work you did citing the song list article. I'm still not convinced the song inspirations can be cited from anything but primary sources, but that's another discussion. Thing is, as you're fully aware, I'm in the process of merging that article's content with the episode list article, with your stated support (in fact, you argued against any delay). So now I'm confused -- are you trying to salvage the song list article after all? Shoebox 2  talk  19:50, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ETA: Further on the subject of sources... even the most plausible of the inspiration cites you've now provided seem to be to the already fully honking obvious -- Cleopatra makes specific mention of Bad Romance, for instance, and the Aztec Priests blatantly riff on the distinctive Stayin' Alive refrain -- which tends to support the idea that the referenced authors aren't working off any more viable info. Certainly the copywriter of a DVD ad, let alone the compiler of a quick blog entry, hasn't confirmed anything with the creators. In addition, different songs have different titles according to different official sources (the show's CBBC website refers to what Webb & Cohen call 'Natural Selection' as 'The Darwin Song').
 * I'm thinking re: titles W&C get ultimate say, so propose adding a line to the top of the list of episodes indicating that the songs have been given their creators' names for them where possible, then hooking the Soundcloud cite to that line. As for the inspirations, between the aforementioned obviousness and stripping out the obviously fan-driven speculation in favour of safely generic guesses (listing "Boudicca" more demurely as an alternative rock parody, for instance), I think we're much better off getting along w/out references for now, rather than compounding the problem with a lot of iffy ones. Thanks, Shoebox 2   talk  04:59, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Would you have preferred me to directly edit your sandbox or sandbox talkpage? I thought so too, and that is why I went for the Song page instead. You are correct - I am fully aware of your merging of the song & episode pages - and so that is why I didn't bother formatting the references perfectly and instead dumped them in to, as I explained, give an example of how I thought the arguably-uncitable column could conceivably be cited. Your dislike of a forced pastiche/parody association for each song is most certainly justified, and going for more general is good. (Although I must confess the Hieroglyphics song is most definitely ABC by The Jackson 5). The titles are always going to be iffy. I didnt write the song list from scratch (instead copying it over form the main page) and the majority of the song titles seemed to use colons or parentheses in order to include all possible titles, for example something like "Natural Selection (The Darwin Song)". That always kinda confused me so I just left it there for the fangirls/boys to sort out rather than forcing a certain version onto the page. I see no reason why your sound judgement in any of these matters should be questioned. :)--Coin945 (talk) 05:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh and by the way, if you want to make adjustments to the HH template, please be my guest. I spent a significant amount of time juggling the info around, and the end product looks aesthetically pleasing to me, but perhaps there is a way you would prefer the information to be organised.--Coin945 (talk) 05:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, OK. Was expecting the referencing discussion to happen on the article talkpages, but no worries. And I had already about decided to take the hint re: the Hieroglyphics song -- it's funny, I don't hear the ABC reference (even though I do know and like that song), but it does appear that most others do, so. That's one thing the refs are really useful for, establishing that kind of consensus. :)
 * As for the template... not sure which one you mean, but if it's to do with the episode list, I don't plan on changing much -- I actually really like the overall setup, the colour-coding and whatnot, and the the organising sketches by era. Basically I just wanted to hilight the songs and tweak the formatting to bring it more in line with the house MOS. Shoebox 2   talk  16:57, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ETA: OK, so I told a small orange lie. :) The blue-to-slightly-darker blue transition for Series 4-5 just finally got too confusing, so I went for something with more contrast. Shoebox 2  talk  20:26, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh I was actually referring to this: "Horrible Histories". The current episodes table is, i believe, colour-coded based on the covers of the various series DVDs. So any change in those would be entirely justified - thats a relatively arbitrary method.--Coin945 (talk) 16:20, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Got you. Thanks again for the offer. The thing is, as I've mentioned before, my interest in HH is pretty exclusively with the TV-verse -- I'm a fan of the show and the actors therein, basically. My involvement with the books is limited to a passing glance in a bookstore when they were first released long ago; I was amused and impressed, and when I saw they'd made a TV series was inspired to check it out on that recommendation... at which point I became aware for the first time that there even was a multimedia HH franchise been built up in the interim. (It doesn't help that since then, frankly, I've been much less than impressed with Terry Deary himself, esp. the cracks about libraries.)
 * There's just no way I could do any of it justice. On the other hand, I know there are a significant lot of people out there for whom HH in print is still very much the only HH worth mentioning. You want to go looking for one of them to give you a hand, maybe on Tumblr or one of those fan-run wikis I mentioned previously. Or if you wanted to tackle it yourself after all, I'm sure you could find a veteran editor to mentor the process. Shoebox 2   talk  04:12, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Sweet Disaster
Hello, I'm Deb. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.

I would recommend reading NPOV tutorial. Deb (talk) 12:14, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Going Equipped (short film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Derek Robinson


 * Not Without My Handbag (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Robert Booth

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Good work
Just wanted to chime in and thank you for setting up TDWFB stuff; In particular, I wanted to thank you for your call for a greater diversity in proposals.

I had proposed some extremely pointed content, but not out of any conviction that pointed contented is the most effective. In encouraging a greater diversity of content, you help to ensure our success. Thx again for all your hard work. --HectorMoffet (talk) 14:30, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

MfD nomination of The Day We Fight Back
The Day We Fight Back, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:The Day We Fight Back and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of The Day We Fight Back during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Beerest 2 talk 02:02, 16 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I am not sure where to offer you this feedback. I saw the mfd on WP:The Day We Fight Back.  I agree the page should not be deleted, as we keep proposals, even ones that fail.  On a purely personal level I strongly agree with the sentiments of the The Day We Fight Back coalition.  However, I am afraid the nominator has a valid point, WP:NOT says the wikipedia should not be used for "advocacy".  If there was truly overwhelming support to undertake the measures you support, WP:NOT wouldn't matter.  But I am afraid you won't find that overwhelming support.  I've done a lot of work helping to cover topics related to counter-terrorism, and there is a phenomenon one finds in the general body politic, and one finds in wikipedia contributors.  There are lots of people who accept as obvious that the post-9/11 recognition of risks to the public from terrorism require the general public to docilely roll over and allow security officials to steamroll traditional rights to privacy, free association, free speech.  As I said, on a personal level I strongly disagree with these individuals.  In my experience, when the public track record of clandestine rights-violating security measures are examined, in detail, one finds a record of terrible childish incompetence.  The clandestine measures where the public has been expected to meekly acquiese to the surrender of their rights have not succeeded in making us safer.  Rather, in my opinion, the reverse has proven true.  The secrecy with which such measures are protected have allowed officials to skip the normal sanity checking, and the regular auditing and checks and balances one can expect in just about any other field.  Cheers!  Geo Swan (talk) 16:26, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

More good work-- your thoughts on options
Thanks again for your work on TDWFB. One of the things I think may help clarify things for people new to the discussion is make-visible to people that there are "multiple visions" for how we could handle Feb. 11.

I get the feeling that you basically want Feb 11 to be a "special day" where content that meets traditional Main Page criteria and is selecting using traditional Main Page processes.

I, on the other hand, would probably prefer to word it as: "On Feb 11, we replace MainPage with an editorial that is clearly marked as an editorial, but which may take on the stylistic elements of our traditional Mainpage".

But the truth is I do not know WHAT the community will want, and ultimately, I only want the option that the community wants. I'm "widening the menu" of options to help ensure that we be prepared to implement the community's consensus, whatever it may be.

So visit The Day We Fight Back/Options and see if you think the terminology and descriptions match your idea for the guidelines you'd propose for Feb 11. Please add or alter to make sure your view is reflected in the options.

I have written some really pointed, value-laden potential content, but that doesn't necessarily indicate I am convinced that's the best approach. I trust in the editorial process of our community to figure out the best approach and to later weed the good ideas from the bad ideas.

Fun working with you on this! --HectorMoffet (talk) 15:15, 16 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Put simply, your vision will never be accepted by the community. Mine just barely scrapes by. As a bypasser who read a discussion, saw the support, and created the article, I seem to have become some sort of torchbearer (good god what an awful malaprop) for this project.. and I don't like it. I've been discussing this on the DYK and ITN talk pages all day and i've lost interest in the whole idea. If it goes ahead, great. If it doesn't, great too. But either way I would like to see more themed days on the main page. This quite frankly is not a cause i feel like fighting tooth and nail for. And i've probably already overstepped my boundary. So I'm not getting involved any more. I've said my piece - fully explaining how i think the project could go ahead...the *only* way it could conceivably go ahead - and now I'll leave the rest of you guys to battle it out.--Coin945 (talk) 15:23, 16 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry to hear you're a bit demoralized.  For my part, I think your contributions have been incredibly helpful and have done a good job of representing what the community with actually support.
 * I would not be at all surprised if the community prefers a "special day" to an "editorial day"-- I only hope that by making the contrast clearer to them, I can help the community decide what it wants.
 * For the record, for me, this hasn't been a "battle it out" experience--  I'm comfortable with whatever outcome the community chooses, and I suspect your approach is going to be the one that garners the most support.
 * Sorry you've taken some hits;  For my part, I really appreciate your contributions and I generally think your nominations and approach are superior to my own meager contributions. :)
 * Thanks, and don't let them get ya down.   This is a new frontier for Wikipedia-- we're all gonna get stuck with a few thorns as we blaze this new trail together. --HectorMoffet (talk) 16:56, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, in the section with the images, you commented "Not FA. Not enough time to get it to FA." [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:The_Day_We_Fight_Back&curid=41639942&diff=590980635&oldid=590974356] Did you mean to write "FP"? &mdash; rybec   16:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I meant FA status.--Coin945 (talk) 16:54, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * By FP, I mean featured picture. By FA, did you mean featured article? A picture isn't an article, yet you left comments "not FA" by the pictures. "Not a featured picture" would make sense. &mdash; rybec   17:16, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Pictures can still be FA status. Either way, who cares. If you consider it a typo, then be WP:BOLD and change it yourself. This is seriously way too trivial a quibble for me to care strongly enough about.--Coin945 (talk) 18:03, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Al Dente (short film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mike Cooper (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Horrible Histories BAFTA win 2011.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Horrible Histories BAFTA win 2011.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 19:03, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits
Thank you for your constructive and informative edits to the pages for Pray Anything, The Strong Arms of the Ma and C.E. D'oh. Could you help with the articles for season 16 episodes as well, now that it's out on DVD? Cheers. Wimpyguy (talk) 23:49, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome. :) Ill do whatever I can to help out here and there. Haven't gotten my hands on the season 16/17 DVDs just yet so will help using the souves at my disposal.--Coin945 (talk) 06:02, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Today's articles for improvement/Nominated articles: Encyclopedic dictionary
Hello there! I noticed that you are active on several article nomaninations at the TAFI page, and I was just wondering if you were interested to support the nomination of an article encyclopedic dictionary.

Wikipedia is perhaps the most revolutionizing act in the history of dictionaries and encyclopedias. However, there's been surprisingly little written about the other forms of encyclopedia, such as encyclopedic dictionaries. I'm not sure if there are any encyclopedic dictionaries anymore being published, but a good article on those sure would help better to position our dear Wikipedia in the field of encyclopedic history!

Thanks a lot and keep up the good work! :) Jayaguru-Shishya (talk) 16:04, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Your recent edits to Horrible Histories (2009 TV series)
Coin, I'm not sure if you've noticed, but I'm in the process of shepherding this article through an exhaustive GA nomination, with an eye toward eventual FA status. Correcting factual errors is fine, but for now I am requesting that you please avoid directly making any edits that alter the article's content out of line with either the existing text or specifically recommended changes. If you feel strongly that something should be added/altered, the place to take it is as always to the article talkpage for consensus; you're also welcome to comment directly on the GA reviewer's recommendations as you like. Shoebox 2  talk  17:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I did end up reverting your most recent edit. As mentioned above, the middle of a GA review is not the best time to start messing with text that hasn't been called out as a problem. In addition, you have to remember that a) there are actually three 'Americas', ie. North, Central and South; and b) to about 85% if not more of the English Wiki readership 'America', singular, is synonymous with 'United States', thus 'pre-colonial America' automatically reads as 'the United States before the white settlers showed up'. Meaning that c) no, 'pre-colonial Americas' doesn't work either -- the show doesn't, in fact, deal with the United States (or more accurately the land thereof) before the white settlers showed up, so we're just substituting potential confusion for outright incorrect info.


 * That said, I agree that the current wording isn't optimal, but it does get across that the focus is on all the Americas in general and the one country in particular, and the wikilink can clarify the rest as needed. Otherwise, again, a very experienced and thorough GA/FA reviewer didn't see a problem, so let's not start fixing what clearly isn't broken, eh? :) Shoebox 2   talk  13:29, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Forgot to add (sorry for general incoherence, it's still fairly early around here) that this statement is in the lead, which is supposed to be a short, broad summary of more detailed content in the body of the article. If you check the Format section, you'll see that I re-added the Incas and Aztecs to the list of eras/civilizations specifically to help mitigate this problem. Overall, there is very little chance of even a casual reader coming away from this article unclear as to the show's coverage of the Americas. Shoebox 2   talk  14:21, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

The Simpsons and Their Mathematical Secrets
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of The Simpsons and Their Mathematical Secrets, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.npr.org/books/titles/240773170/the-simpsons-and-their-mathematical-secrets.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:45, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Naming of elements
What do you think of the naming of elements article now? --Jakob (talk) 12:26, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Wow...a major improvement. Thankyou. My stupid introduction still needs fixing though. And obviously more info on the different types of things elements are named after. And perhaps some info about how compounds/rocks etc. can be named from the element base roots. :) (on a side point, do you think the article deserves to exist? I decided to create it, along with a few others, in an attempt to provide a solution to the controversial Periodic Table issues that had been clogging up the Wikiproject talk page in the form of long convoluted discussions. The idea was to show all sides of the issue and not shove any one down the reader's throat. I think there is merit to this topic, but what do you think (as a much more intimate part of the Wikiproject's operations)?--Coin945 (talk) 15:30, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Good job on Just Around the Riverbend
Nice work. I improved the formatting and added wikilinks. -- Brainy J  ~ ✿ ~ ( talk ) 22:34, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thankyou ((ping|Brainy J}} :)--Coin945 (talk) 11:02, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Main Page appearance: Horrible Histories (2009 TV series)
This is a note to let the main editors of Horrible Histories (2009 TV series) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on April 16, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at present, please ask. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/April 16, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Horrible Histories is a children's sketch-comedy adaptation of Terry Deary's long-running book series, produced by Lion Television with Citrus Television, that ran for five 13-episode series on Britain's CBBC from 2009 to 2013. Like the books, it was intended to foster childrens' interest in British and other Western world history through factual anecdotes chosen with a focus on "gross-out"-style humour and comic violence – "history with the nasty bits left in". The producers of the TV series recruited writers and performers with roots in the adult British comedy community. These in turn took a deliberately non-condescending approach, relying instead on such influences as Blackadder and the Monty Python films. A focus on historical accuracy was combined with a comedy style relying heavily on parodies of current UK pop-culture to make those facts more accessible, leading to takeoffs of Masterchef, The Apprentice and Wife Swap among others. The result won numerous domestic and international awards, including two British Comedy Awards and four consecutive Children's BAFTAs, and eventually garnered respect as a classic from viewers of all ages. UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Placement of lanthanides and actinides in the periodic table


The article Placement of lanthanides and actinides in the periodic table has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Looks like an abandoned draft. No real content other than the lede, which doesn't include any information and is written like an essay.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ahecht ( TALK PAGE ) 18:56, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Troublesome 20th Century.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Troublesome 20th Century.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Placement of hydrogen in the periodic table


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Placement of hydrogen in the periodic table requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. Ahecht ( TALK PAGE ) 16:45, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

PAGE''' ]] ) 17:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
 * for further context on these chemistry stub articles' creation, please see WikiProject Elements - seen in this older revision of the page here. That should explain the articles' existence. Or at least justify their original creation. (oh, and in regard to the actually deletion nominations, an article's existence should be based solely on whether the concept itself is notable, not based on its current state.)--Coin945 (talk) 02:29, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
 * That's not quite true that an article's existence is solely based on the concept, not the article. Otherwise speedy deletion criteria WP:A1 and WP:A3 (and to a lesser extent WP:G5) wouldn't exist. I was aware of the background behind your creating the articles, but the necessity of those articles as a place to codify debate did not seem to gain any consensus from the WikiProject. An article devoid of content would be better suited for a userspace or AfC draft. --Ahecht ( [[User_talk:Ahecht|'''TALK

Disambiguation link notification for April 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Madeline (TV series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KOL (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Brick Like Me
Hey, i trimmed the reviews down at Brick Like Me cause were not really supposed to post full reviews, so i just tried to add in the main points. Koala15 (talk) 19:17, 5 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't mean to cause offense. I'm just stating my opinion. FYI I wouldn't call that trimming. I'd call it reverting, and then adding back a tiny bit here and there in subsequent edits. As one example, check out the section for Time magazine:


 * "James Poniewozik of Time gave the episode a positive review, saying "Brick Like Me" demonstrates that The Simpsons still has it, at least sometimes. Afterward, you and the kids can pop in the season 3 DVD and compare. Or put together the Lego Simpsons’ House–only $199.99, Brik-E-Mart not included."


 * I think that everything after the first sentence is not relevant whatsoever, and was only included because it happened to be int he final paragraph of that article. Note that I'm the first to admit that I included wayy to much info into the article, but there were some great points in there nonetheless. Compare the above to the info I thought was relevant:


 * James Poniewozik of Time gave the episode a positive review, and discounted the gimmicky nature of the episode, arguing "the two franchises simply play well together: Bart and company are every bit as iconic and expressive as squared-off plastic, while the smash-up-and-mash-up properties of Lego are perfect fodder for the series’ appetite for deconstruction". He said "'Brick Like Me' shows that The Simpsons can still be inspired, weird, and sincere, when all the pieces fall into place... The Simpsons still has it, at least sometimes."


 * There are a lot less wasted words, and a lot more points addressed. Yes, in my edit too many points were shoved into the article, but I also realised that many of the points were actually duplicated so I assumed the next logical step would have been to segment the review statements based on the topic, and then for each writing a statement that sums each up. For example, "the animation was praised" (link to reviews x, y, z), as was the voice acting of Smith and Castellaneta (x, y) etc.


 * I really don't mind the article how it is. I just figured there's so much depth to those reviews that is missing here, and it's a shame that the critical reception section doesn't give a much better representation of the richness to what reviewers liked and disliked.--Coin945 (talk) 19:37, 5 May 2014 (UTC)--Coin945 (talk) 19:37, 5 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Feel free to fix it or trim it if you think you can improve it. Koala15 (talk) 19:50, 5 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Kind of did just that earlier today... and look how that turned out.. :P (and no, i do not want to enter into a revert war).--Coin945 (talk) 19:59, 5 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Well just keep in mind when writing a reception section were not supposed to paste half of the review. Koala15 (talk) 23:23, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

The War of Art (The Simpsons)
Good work on this article, mate. I reckon you should add a "production" section, as Matt Selman gave a fair bit information about the episode on his Twitter page, and maybe a "cultural references" section, although maybe that'd require sources that aren't from the episode. Either way, you could submit it as a GA after some extra work. :) I'd help, but I'm not very good with links and sources. Wimpyguy (talk) 23:54, 9 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Thankyou very much for your kind words. Unfortunately while I'm good at scouting for sources and info-dumping, I'm a woeful copyeditor. I can't bare to let go of any info because I deem things notable and important when in the context of the article seem like trivialities. I also struggle with paraphrasing: how can I write something using different words while saying the same thing. Thirdly, I did a major buff up of the critical reception section for Brick Like Me, only to be reverted by Koala15, so I don't particularly feel like diving head first into an article right now...especially a Simpsons one. But thanks again. :) P.S. Due to l those classic simpsons reviews by the av club etc. recently being released, all the golden age season articles can be heavily improved. No way am I touching an FA or GA but since you worked on some of them maybe that's something you could look into. --Coin945 (talk) 10:05, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * (here we are. Though wayyy too long, I think the actual review information included have a much filler description of the feedback by reviewers than copy/pasting the last paragraph of each review imdescriminately and hoping for the best. Not complaining mind you. A bit miffed sure. But just explaining that loss-of-work feeling that puts you off).--Coin945 (talk) 10:15, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Broadway Backwards


A tag has been placed on Broadway Backwards, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, 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. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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, you can place a request here.  KJ  &#171;Click Here&#187; 07:27, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Dispute
I understand you wrote a version of the section and want it be used, but it is seriously flawed we don't need to organize it by topic. Not every site that reviews the episode is notable, we just need a small summary of the reviews. Take a good article like Exit Through the Kwik-E-Mart for example, that's how a reception section should look. Koala15 (talk) 19:33, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Repost of Anya (Anastasia)
A tag has been placed on requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion  tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit |the page's discussion directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of recreating the page. Thank you. Shvybzik (talk) 05:53, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=610062386 your edit] to Dug's Special Mission may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:10, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * com/2009/up-rising-with-story-artist-and-dugs-special-missions-director-ronnie-del-carmen/ . Project approval for the short was given by Disney during January 2009, and production ended in

Disambiguation link notification for May 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Brave Little Toaster (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ron Miller (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Twisted Tales (book series) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Twisted Tales (book series) 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/Twisted Tales (book series) 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. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:50, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Top Ten (book series) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Top Ten (book series) 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/Twisted Tales (book series) 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. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:50, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * On a side note, do you think it'd be a good idea to just make a list page for all of the spinoffs and close the AfD early? My only reservation with that is that I would like some confirmation that there weren't sources I missed due to the common-ness of the names, so I don't want to completely merge everything into one list and then have it be worthy of its own article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   10:33, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Well I have a pretty good idea which should definitely be deserving of an article, and which ones tow the line. But in general a lot of them shouldn't even be considered spinoffs, and were placed there years ago because Terry Deary wrote them, or for other reasons. It's just messy, and most of them arent very notable either. Perhaps getting the community to suss this out is the best course of action. It's certainly stumped me for a while.--Coin945 (talk) 11:03, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Endless Night (song)


The article Endless Night (song) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No evidence of any notability.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pam D  19:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Belle Reprise (Disney)


The article Belle Reprise (Disney) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable song. No evidence of notability. A one-minute reprise.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pam D  19:36, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited On My Own (Les Misérables), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page B flat (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

One Jump Ahead
A one line sentence without any sources is no indication of potential. While a stub may be short with room to grow, it still must pass WP:N. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 17:58, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Okay. Your argument makes sense. I apologise for this conflict created by our conflicting opinions. Just to clarify, if I created a developed article on this song with sources and headings etc., it would potentially be considered article-worthy?--Coin945 (talk) 18:49, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Of course. I'll let others determine if the sources are enough to make it notable or not. I would see if you could incorporate these songs into other articles first unless 1) the other article is so large a split is preferable or 2) there is substantial coverage in reliable sources on the song itself and not in an overall review of the musical, film, or soundtrack. Not every song needs its own article. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 21:14, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * (It's) Hairspray (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hairspray


 * (You're) Timeless to Me (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hairspray


 * Big, Blonde and Beautiful (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hairspray


 * Come So Far (Got So Far to Go) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hairspray


 * Good Morning Baltimore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hairspray


 * I Know Where I've Been (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hairspray


 * Mama, I'm a Big Girl Now (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hairspray


 * Run and Tell That (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hairspray


 * The New Girl in Town (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hairspray


 * The Nicest Kids in Town (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hairspray


 * You Can't Stop the Beat (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Hairspray

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:48, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Song stubs
Please don't create articles for songs where the only information is their origin. These work much better as redirects. Songs need independent notability to warrant a separate article (it isn't sufficient that the album, musical, ... is notable to have an article on each song), and articles need to have more information than what a redirect would offer. Fram (talk) 09:52, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * It's not a case of there being no sources. It's simply a case of me creating an article that I know is notable, but haven't actually gotten around to adding sources. I think with something like this, breadth is much more important than depth. Now we have basic stubs for songs from some of the most famous and popular musicals, making it much easier for users to contribute. Each one may be small, but the info within them are correct, and a quick Google Search reveals there is actually a wealth of information available on pretty much all of them. I work on Wikipedia based on potential of an article rather than current state. After all, Not paper.--Coin945 (talk) 10:03, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * This has nothing to do with notpaper, but everything with accepting redlinks and redirects when you don't add any information. Pleae also see WP:NSONGS: "Coverage of a song in the context of an album review does not establish notability. If the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, that material should be contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created.". Fram (talk) 10:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

The articles you write are also some 80% quotes, which is way too much. Please write them in your own words, with references, but without the overwhelming use of quotes. Plus, make sure that the reviews you do include are about the song, and not about the performer. 11:24, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Please stop, slow down, take your time
First you created countless microstubs missing any information. Now, when these get redirected, you rush into creating articles, but what you produce is overquoted and underresearched.

Take e.g. I Can Hear the Bells.
 * For starters, where are the wikilinks? Even the link to the actual musical, which I provided in the redirect, is removed again.
 * Production: "Nikki Blonsky, who plays Tracy Turnblad in the 2007 live-action musical film, was sick the day the vocals were recorded." And? Who took her place? Who sang the original (original cast soundtrack)?
 * Synopsis: "After bushing past Link, the main lead on the Corny Collins Show, Tracy Turnblad starts to dream about what her life would be like if she pursued a relationship with her. These thoughts of a future wedding and perfect romance and idealised." Um, with "her"? I think you mean with "him"... The second sentence isn't even a sentence.
 * Composition: "Orlando Sentinel notes "the chorus members produce bells whose tinkling emphasizes the dream setting of the song"." Too bad that the source given makes it clear that these were not in the original, but are an idea of the local director only... So, the only info you have on the composition is not a part of the original composition but of one later, local version of it.
 * Critical reception: most of these are very passing mentions, cases where this song gets about the least attention of all songs, like here (is that even a reliable source?) or the two mentions here. It gets one word here, which seems to be a fair indication of its notability and why it should be redirected per WP:NSONGS. This is not a reliable source], neither is this. Fram (talk) 12:21, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

This kind of resurrection of an article really isn't sufficient. Two sources, one unreliable (an angelfire fan website), and one that gives no information about the song whatsoever (the one line that mentions it is about a specific performer, not about the song), is really not enough to base an article on. Fram (talk) 08:54, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

"Please stop" is not the same as "start editing as User:60.230.203.57". Discussion is crucial on a collaborative environment like Wikipedia. Please discuss your edits instead of ignoring messages and continuing making the same type of edits on and on. Fram (talk) 10:30, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

And you are again adding, apart from unreliable sources and the like, some complete misinterpretations: in Ladies' Choice (song), you claim that "At this point, he had only been known for his higher register in High School Musical.", which is not supported by the source at all (rather the complete opposite). It is better to have no articles (or to have redirects) than to have such incorrect, rushed articles. You urgently need to stop these kind edits and start discussing things. Fram (talk) 10:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

About the NBC broadcast you posted on Talk:Frozen (2013 film)
Sorry for using consensus to cut you out. I think this source may have enough weight. Could you please generalise some points in her response so that we can discuss on that? Thank you.Forbidden User (talk) 16:42, 30 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what you're talking about. Whatever you are referring to, I wrote a while back and can't remember the source or being cut out via consensus or anything.--Coin945 (talk) 17:37, 30 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Found it. Yeah, Julie doesn't actually give a statement unfortunately, but yeah it's transcribed for you anyhow.--Coin945 (talk) 17:52, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of When Will My Life Begin?


The article When Will My Life Begin? has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Does not appear to meet the notability criteria for music, was not released as a single, etc.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:23, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of When Will My Life Begin? for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article When Will My Life Begin? 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/When Will My Life Begin? 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. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:48, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 4 July
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:34, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * On the Willkommen page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=615562915 your edit] caused an unnamed parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F615562915%7CWillkommen%5D%5D Ask for help])

Reference Errors on 9 July
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * On the When I Grow Up (Matilda) page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=616265598 your edit] caused an unnamed parameter error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F616265598%7CWhen I Grow Up (Matilda)%5D%5D Ask for help])

Proposed deletion of AKA Life


The article AKA Life has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable film

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BOVINEBOY 2008 01:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Ladies Who Lunch (song)


A tag has been placed on The Ladies Who Lunch (song) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article has never existed, has been deleted or is eligible for deletion itself. 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 music.

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 "Click here to 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 deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 15:50, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

JSTOR - Action required
We need your email address in order to give/renew your JSTOR access. Please email Library Coordinator Ocaasi at jorlowitz@undefinedgmail.com so we can get you your account as soon as possible. Thanks The Interior  (Talk) 23:17, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Hercules (franchise)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Hercules (franchise), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://freekidscartoons.com/?seriale=disney-hercules.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:24, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia
Hi, Coin945. :)

As you know, CorenSearchBot picked up some duplication issues in Hercules (franchise) - obviously, not an issue of copying the external site that it mentioned, but you do seem to have copied content from several Wikipedia articles. While it's perfectly okay to copy content from one article to another, our license does require that you provide attribution unless you are the sole author. Primarily, this is done through linking to the original article in edit summary with an explanation that content is copied. Please see Copying within Wikipedia for specifics. Even though this is a copyright issue, it's easily reparable. Can you please provide attribution in the manner described for each article from which you copied content so that the article is copyright compliant? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:08, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Fantasia (franchise)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Fantasia (franchise), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://animationartstudio.com/animation-art/animation-cel-drawing-fantasia.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:36, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Please note that will this page is not a copyright violation, Moonriddengirls comment above applies here as well, please ensure that you follow Copying within Wikipedia in the future-- Jac 16888 Talk 19:03, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * This page is indeed a copyright violation. Taking content without meeting the terms of the license violates the copyright of the contributors - our content is not public domain. It must be fixed immediately. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:59, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:JSTOR access
Hello, WP:The Wikipedia Library has record of you being approved for access to JSTOR through the TWL partnership described at WP:JSTOR. You should have recieved a Wikipedia email User:The Interior sent several weeks ago with instructions for access, including a link to a form collecting information relevant to that access. Please find that email, and follow those instructions. If you were not approved, did not recieve the email, or are having some other concern or question, please respond to this message at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved. Thanks much, Sadads (talk) 21:08, 5 August 2014 (UTC) Note: You are recieving this message from an semi-automatically generated list. If you think you were incorrectly contacted, make sure to note that at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved.

Orphaned non-free image File:Good Game Roffle Cup 2012.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Good Game Roffle Cup 2012.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:50, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hex playing a game for Good Game.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Hex playing a game for Good Game.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:50, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * The Emperor's New Groove (franchise)
 * added a link pointing to Kingdom of the Sun


 * The Sweatbox
 * added a link pointing to Neil Brown

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Magna Carta (series), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Softmax. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Movie marathon for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Movie marathon 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/Movie marathon 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. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:20, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Movie marathon


A tag has been placed on Movie marathon requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and 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.

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 "Click here to 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 deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Mr. Guye (talk) 21:51, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of One Hundred and One Dalmatians (franchise) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article One Hundred and One Dalmatians (franchise) 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/Disney franchises 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. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 22:25, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Copyright violations must cease
Coin945, you have again violated the license of our contributors by copying content from one article to another without attribution. You are permitted to copy content from compatibly licensed sources, but if you do so without meeting your obligations (such as specific ttribution), then you may be in violation of their copyright and are definitely in violation of our copyright policy and Terms of Use.

You were given clear instructions above for how to do this; if you do not understand them, I suggest you seek assistance. It is not enough to say "various articles" as I note you did in one instance, and in One Hundred and One Dalmatians (franchise) - the day after you were told about this requirement - you didn't even bother to do that. Nor did you do it in The Hunchback of Notre Dame (franchise) or Fantasia (franchise).

If you do this again you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Please, if you don't understand, seek assistance. You need to repair your copyright violations immediately. Copying within Wikipedia tells you how. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:48, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Cinderella (Disney franchise)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Cinderella (Disney franchise), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.ranker.com/review/cinderella/735985.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:07, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=623876059 your edit] to List of Disney Interactive Studios games may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:13, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * *Disney's Activity Center|Disney/Pixar's Toy Story 2 Activity Center  (2002)