User talk:FormerUser103

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --OpenToppedBus - My Talk July 6, 2005 16:25 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.


 * By the way, if you're the same Garrick92 who used to (and may still) contribute to the Guardian talk boards, a special welcome - you've got a lot to offer to Wikipedia (I'm sure you have even if you're not the same person - good work on spontaneous human combustion.) OpenToppedBus - My Talk July 6, 2005 16:30 (UTC)


 * One last thing (sorry to keep hassling you!) Given the (potentially) controversial nature of some of what you're saying about SHC, it might be worthwhile at some point having a look at No original research and What Wikipedia is not - if only to be forewarned about ways in which people might criticise what you're adding there. Not knowing much about the topic, it seems to me that you may well be right in your criticisms of the BBC programme - but if you can't cite your sources, you're likely to find other editors less responsive. OpenToppedBus - My Talk July 6, 2005 16:44 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in replying - I tried a couple of days ago but my PC crashed. I'd rather not say who I was at GU - suffice it to say, I'm not there any more. There's no real convention as to whether you reply on your own talk page or someone else's. The former keeps the conversation together, but only the latter will guarantee that they see the reply. Some people put a note at the top of their talk page to say that they will always reply there.

You say about SHC that "given the topic, it's something that is never going to satisfy everyone". You'd be surprised - we have relatively stable articles on abortion, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, even (dare I say it?) Diana, Princess of Wales... The first two of those in particular are good examples of how to handle controversial topics - we report the controversy, and the people on either side of it, but we don't (even subtly) try to come down on one side or the other ourselves. You're definitely going about it the right way with the use of reputable sources and copious references. One style point is that we normally only link to something the first time that it is mentioned, rather than linking to wick, for example, every time. OpenToppedBus - My Talk 15:49, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

David Penhaligon
You say "Several friends and colleagues have attested to Penhaligon's habitually 'reckless' driving and refusal to wear 'seatbelts'". Do you have a cite for this? It does seem a bit insensitive to mention it in this context unless it's unimpeachable. David | Talk 15:28, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Penhaligon
Just had a look at your userpage and it seems pretty neat and tidy, so I'm replying here rather than muck it up. My source is actually personal, as I know a former Liberal party worker who worked very closely with Penhaligon in Cornwall. His wife also knew Penhaligon and both of them have attested to 'white-knuckle' rides in Penhaligon's car. Their precise words were: "The man drove like a fucking lunatic". Other conversations I have had since have confirmed this. H o w e v e r ... I can see that this might not fit the Wikipedia source policy (I assume such exists). I'm new here, so feel free to scrub my edit if I've committed a wikipedia faux pas: I'm sure it isn't the first and won't be the last ... Garrick92 15:46, 14 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Probably there weren't many cars around at a quarter to seven in the morning in the middle of December, which may well not have helped. Unfortunately having personal knowledge of this sort is often removed under the No original research policy - which is sometimes a pity. It's sometimes possible to hint at the explanation without actually saying it - I'll see what can be done to the article. PS welcome to Wikipedia, I'm sure you'll love it here! David | Talk 18:42, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Chicken hypnotism
Please see Talk:Chicken hypnotism. Your addition to the article is just weird enough that it could really use a citation. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:52, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

Your wish ...
... is my co-operation. If I have a fault (apart from my immense personal charm and disarming modesty) it is that I tend to suffer from 'I'll do that bit later' syndrome. Anyway, the info you desire is at the Talk:Chicken hypnotism page.

Image Tagging Image:Chagossian protest.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Chagossian protest.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  howch e  ng   {chat} 16:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this: I note that the entire article has been moved to 'articles that may be biased' and that the link from 'Diego Garcia' has been removed outright. So I shan't be bothering on this occasion, but I'll try to remember your advice for future instances. Garrick92 11:04, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Spontaneous Human Combustion
This is to inform you that a comment made at Talk:Spontaneous_human_combustion by you is being considered for deletion. While technically there is no policy in place to delete such comments from talk pages, the comment itself is not particularly conducive to the point of talk pages, which is to help fellow wikipedians edit the page. Unless someone speaks up at the talk page, your comment will likely be deleted. Should you decide to make an issue out of it, however, it is likely that your comment will stay in place. You may defend its existence or ignore it, at your leisure. &mdash; Eric Herboso 16:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I choose to ignore it. Garrick92 14:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Jacqueline Fitzsimon
Looks like you are the first editor on this article. If it's not on your watch page you should know it has been submitted to AfD Articles for deletion/Jacqueline Fitzsimon Jeepday (talk) 03:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Ta for the heads-up. Have added my two pennorth, and that's the end of my involvement. Garrick92 14:05, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

sources for Diego Garcia memos
Hi Garrick92,

the quotes from internal memos in the article on the depopulation of Diego Garcia are very interesting. They're all marked with "citation needed", and I couldn't find any of the text on the Web. It seems from the article's history that you created the article with these quotes already in place. Could you add sources for them?

Joriki (talk) 17:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Corpse_of_Hitler_doppelganger_1946.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Corpse_of_Hitler_doppelganger_1946.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly hi! 15:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Uday and double.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Uday and double.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 description 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. --FairuseBot (talk) 02:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Image permission problem with Image:Corpse of Hitler doppelganger 1946.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Corpse of Hitler doppelganger 1946.jpg I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media 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 GFDL 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 [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org 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 did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image 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 uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jay32183 (talk) 06:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Garrick92! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is an  Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current  article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) John E. Heymer -

Copyright problem: Wilton M. Krogman
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Wilton M. Krogman, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/information/biography/klmno/krogman_wilton.html, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Wilton M. Krogman and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Wilton M. Krogman, in your email. See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Wilton M. Krogman with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Wilton M. Krogman. See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:Wilton M. Krogman saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Abductive (reasoning) 15:29, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

File:Alleged hess double at nuremberg trials.jpeg needs authorship information.
Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Alleged hess double at nuremberg trials.jpeg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided),authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: will produce an appropriate expansion,

or the own template..

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:16, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Oswald and alleged double.jpeg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Oswald and alleged double.jpeg, 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. Gamaliel ( talk ) 19:54, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of The Entrancing Flame for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Entrancing Flame 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 Entrancing Flame 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. Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  14:58, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of The Hum for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Hum 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 Hum 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. Guy (Help!) 23:45, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)