User talk:Doublethink64

Duplicate images uploaded
Thanks for uploading Image:.britishworker1cover.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Britishworker1cover.jpg. The copy called Image:Britishworker1cover.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot (talk) 19:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image deletion
I deleted it because it was suspected copyright infringement, but it's OK now since you've asserted that you're the copyright holder. east. 718 at 12:28, November 25, 2007

BNP and Rehabilitation of Offenders Act
You removed some information about Kevin Scott's convictions from the BNP article, saying that the information violated the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. As far as I can see, though, the Act says that individuals do not have to reveal convictions after a certain time if asked about them, but it doesn't say anything about third-parties (i.e., Wikipedia) talking about spent convictions. Could you say more about why you think the information you removed is unlawful according to the act (note that even if it is, that doesn't necessarily mean it shouldn't be on Wikipedia, as Wikipedia is hosted by a US organization on servers in the US)? And why just that information, and not the information about other individuals' convictions in that article? Thanks. VoluntarySlave (talk) 11:58, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I think that if you study the act you will see that individuals who have their spent convictions revealed are entitled to bring an action for defamation if they can show malice. In this case malice is pretty evident from the context. There is a defence if a public interest can be shown. If you look at the discussion page of the BNP article you can see the cogent argument put for this and my own counter-argument. As to why I have amended this and not the others it is because the Act depends on the sentence. In the case mentioned I know that the sentence was a conditional discharge and therefore what the time limit for the ROA is. I don't know the details of the other cases. I understand, however, that two of those others mentioned are no longer members of the BNP so the question there is one of accuracy and relevance. As to American servers this is not my point. I'm a UK citizen concerned to prevent unjustifiable breaking of UK law through edits and argument. I'm not taking legal action. I think that the principle behind the Act is a good one and I see no reason why it should be broken. If people don't repeat offences for some years surely we should let them move on and not drag up the past? Opponents of the BNP can surely find other cases not covered by the Act if that Party is as they assert. (Doublethink64 (talk) 19:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC))

Image copyright problem with Image:3wnlpposter.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:3wnlpposter.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --23:22, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
As you admit to being Patrick Harrington, I must advise you of our conflict of interest guideline, and recommend you refrain from making any changes to articles where you have a conflict of interest, and instead raise any proposed edits of the talk pages of the articles concerned.

If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. 2 lines of K 303  15:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Britishworker1cover.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:15, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Solcolour1.jpg


The file File:Solcolour1.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Personal file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing 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 files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:34, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Solad1.jpg


The file File:Solad1.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Personal file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing 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 files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:35, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Solcol2.jpg


The file File:Solcol2.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Personal file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing 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 files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:35, 30 December 2018 (UTC)