User talk:Energy

HMS Victory
The status of HMS Victory came straight from the Royal Navy's website, see http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/static/pages/3512.html

BruceRD 14:48, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Barbara and Jenna Bush
I did that 7 months ago. :P Simply put, if anything it didn't belong in the header. I moved them lower in the article. A reference saying that these are their codenames would be extremely useful, though. I didn't remove them, I just took them out of the intro where they didn't belong. Someone else removed them, in this edit summary: "(cur) (last) 22:08, Jan 26, 2005 4.47.234.98 (these change as soon as anyone finds out about them, anyway)" So it probably doesn't make sense to put them back, unless you can cite a reference. --Golbez 17:46, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

Caitlin yocum
Hi - it looks like a not very pleasant "vanity article" - not by the woman herself, but by someone who has a grudge against her. Someone else has already tagged this for speedy deletion, so it won't be long before it's removed. If you find any other articles that look dubious, then you can either list it for speedy deletion if it meets the criteria on this page, or if not, you can list it on Votes for deletion. Thanks for pointing it out! Grutness...  wha?  07:24, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Cyril Suk article
In response to your question about the article I wote on the tennis player Cyril Suk, the reason I was able to get it to that length in only two edits is because I'd already written articles about his sister Helena Sukova and mother Vera Sukova, so much of the info was already on hand. The info came from three main sources:

ATP tennis profile on Cyril Suk - http://www.atptennis.com/en/players/playerprofiles/default2.asp?playernumber=S329

WTA tennis profile on Helena Sukova - http://www.wtatour.com/players/playerprofiles/playerbio.asp?PlayerID=190110

Website about Vera and Helena Sukova and family - http://www.sukova.org/

All info was reformatted by me and written in my own words. I hope that addresses your concerns. (203.120.68.68)

Van Statten
Why isn't he a villain? He was the bad guy - capturing the Doctor and the Dalek, torturing both, willing to sacrifice his men... even though he was a bit helpless at the end and had a slight change of heart, he was definitely sharing the villain spot with the Dalek. --khaosworks 13:02, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Doctor Who edits
I simply clean up edits - I am a bit more ruthless than most when it comes to Doctor Who, but that's because I want to have the articles to a particular standard, and most times I do give reasons for reversions and edits. If you have any issues with those reversions you are more than welcome to take your reasons to talk and let the other editors chime in on them. If you want me to clarify my edits, you are also more than welcome to ask me and I will do my best to explain them. --khaosworks 08:21, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Daleks hovering as kneeling
You don't need a license. What you need to do is back up your edits with evidence. If you can point to me a clear piece of on screen evidence that says that the Daleks are hovering around him in worship, please do. Take that to the Talk:Dalek page. --khaosworks 16:57, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)


 * You can't argue from contra-evidence because there could be any number of explanations. They could have been simply guarding him (higher ground is tactically better). They could have been invisibly recharging from him. The production team could have thought it simply looked cool. Point is, you don't know for sure, and it is fallacious to phrase it as definitive when that is the case. If you still want to discuss it, take it to Talk:Dalek, and we can see what the others think about it. --khaosworks 17:09, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Left/right/bold/italic
You had it almost perfect; check the difference. I do stuff like that all the time, so I was pretty sure what to look for. Joyous (talk) 18:21, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

London bus stop
Subtle Doctor Who humour in Image:Bus stop - london.JPG; I like it! smurray  inch   e  ster  ( User ), ( Talk ) 21:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:Badwolf logo.PNG
Hi, I retagged the above image as "no license" because, although you may have created it yourself, it's clearly a derivative work. Please provide a suitable justification for each article in which it's used under the Non-free content criteria within seven days. --Tony Sidaway 00:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Tony Sidaway 23:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Examplewebsite.PNG listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Examplewebsite.PNG, has been listed at Images and media 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. —Bkell (talk) 15:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Examplewebsite.PNG
 Thanks for uploading File:Examplewebsite.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 orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:38, 12 April 2011 (UTC)