User talk:FLAHAM

September 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Casper Whitney has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. I c eUnshattered  [ t ] 23:01, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Welcome also but your edit to Chartered Institute of Management Accountants seems doubtful. Abtract (talk) 09:38, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hugh Pollard (intelligence officer)
Hi FLAHAM, I am sure your recent reversion of my edit at Hugh Pollard (intelligence officer) was in good faith but the problem is that your contribution with regard to Riley is not at all clear. Simply adding his name to Pollard's books makes it look as if he wrote them, or somehow contributed to them. How is Riley involved with Pollard? If he collaborated with Pollard in some way then you need to state this and also reference it. It might in any event be better to do this at Riley's page rather than Pollard's. Please do not re-revert my edit but rather discuss here first. Many thanks in advance.-- Asteuartw (talk) 10:20, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I think your intention was to add page references to the 1951 book you listed by Ray Riling. Assuming this is correct, I have put your references back in by adding Riling to the list of references and adding the specific page citations so that these appear in the Notes section. Hopefully this keeps your original edit intact while conforming to the formatting of the page. All best wishes ---Asteuartw (talk) 11:39, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reverting the material. The citations to Riling's bibliography are a standard among collectors of sporting arms and shooting books.  They facilitate understanding and eliminate ambiguity.  You will find references to standard bibliographies common in collecting fields, particularly coins, stamps and books.  Incidentally, I originally entered the information for nearly all of Pollard's books into the article using the material in Riling's bibliography.
 * My pleasure. Many thanks for your contributions. Asteuartw (talk) 16:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The AWA Review


The article The AWA Review has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG."

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 article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page 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. Randykitty (talk) 14:51, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of The Antique Wireless Association Review for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Antique Wireless Association Review 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 Antique Wireless Association Review until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Randykitty (talk) 13:30, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:The AWA Review Vol 26 (2013).jpeg
Thank you for uploading File:The AWA Review Vol 26 (2013).jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:41, 7 July 2022 (UTC)