User talk:Freakmighty/Archive 3

Paddock Wood
Hi there. Yes, I know the A21 has congestion problems - I was driving to an interview last week and made the mistake of trying to use the A21 near the roundabout by Pembury Hospital (where it narrows from two lanes to one) and it was a nightmare. However, while I know there is congestion, to add this information to a Wikipedia article there needs to be a reliable third-party source that has commented on it that we can cite as a source. If we add information, no matter how true, that we have found out for ourselves, it counts as original research. Take a look at WP:SOURCES, WP:RS and WP:OR for information. -- JediLofty Talk to meFollow me 08:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think saying if a road jams up or not is 'original research'. There are lots of sources on the A21 road article. FM [ talk to me  |  show contributions  ]  18:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

A21 road
A21 peer review comments have been made. Kind REgards SriMesh | talk  02:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Speedy deletion of Papyrus 99
You're rather too quick for me. Please remove this tag. Thanks. Mercury543210 (talk) 16:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for an equally quick response to this request. Mercury543210 (talk)

List of Estonian commanders and List of former Estonian commanders
I'm creating those pages at the moment so give it rest and wait for few hours until I'm finished - no need to nominate for deletion in 3 seconds.. Karabinier (talk)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:2di.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:2di.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:03, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

User talk:216.111.219.4
You probably don't need to give out warnings to a school IP for edits made over 2 years ago. --Onorem♠Dil 12:34, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * If it was really 2 years ago, there must be an error or something because the edits were shown recently then. FM [ talk to me  |  show contributions  ]  16:55, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:2di.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:2di.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, 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, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

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 14:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rossrs (talk) 14:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:2di.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:2di.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Rossrs (talk) 14:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV
IPs reported for vandalism should have done so recently. Users can change IP addresses, and we want to avoid collateral damage. Remember: blocks are preventive, not punitive. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 18:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Chew Stoke
The edit removed a paragraph which had been duplicated twice.&mdash; Rod talk 18:48, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * OK do we have a tag for "test" rather than vandalism?&mdash; Rod talk 19:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Heh
You beat me to the rollback of some vandalism, which I did in a tab and thought it had gone thru. I'd already blocked the IP when you gave the warning. Whoopsie. :) EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 17:08, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Block notices
Hi, FM. Thanks for the good work you're doing on reverting vandalism, but I don't think you should be posting block notices to user talk pages yourself, like you did this evening at 17:26, 17:29 and 18:36. In the first case, the admin decided not to block and had to remove the notice; in the second case, I did block, but then had to add the length of the block to your notice; and in the third case you duplicated the notice that the admin had already posted. In addition, you'll see that the length of block field wasn't filled in (well you couldn't, of course), which doesn't project a professional image.

But don't take this as criticism, and please keep up the good work! —S MALL JIM   20:10, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Warning Levels
Hi. I have a question about the level 3 warnings recently posted to both 163.153.252.182 and 168.254.225.134. The former had a single level 1 warning back in May, and the later had a single level 1 warning from five days earlier. Doesn't a level 3 warning assume bad faith, and was that evident here? Thanks. --Igoldste (talk) 12:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)