User talk:Karen Johnson

see also User talk:Karen Johnson/old

Yeah! Wikipedia is a happier place now. I hope you had a good holiday. :) --mav

When RK comes back I want to nominate him for sysop (again) I dont ask for much, but I ask that you support his nomination. Sincerely- &#25140;&#30505sv 23:19, Aug 16, 2003 (UTC)

Hi there, you have been listed as "inactive" on Administrators. Please remove the notice when it is out of date. Cheers, Cyan 01:36, 9 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Howdy!
Hey Karen - It was a a real joy to see you on my watchlist again! The encyclopedia and the server situation have improved but we are in transitional period for the community (much more self-governance and less dependence on Jimbo). So there is a bit more drama than there should be at the moment. It seems to be dying down as we continue to improve our new dispute resolution process. I hope to see more of your edits soon! :) --mav 10:00, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Karen you asked if we needed a Landsat 7 article. Here's my take - when chasing most wanted pages (sort of my hobby) I try to look at the links and decide if a redirect or simply editing the source pages make more sense. in this case, the alternate page is Landsat program. the problem is, as people post more and more landsat images, it seems to me that we'll end up with a Lot of links to Landsat 7.

Wikibooks
Wikibooks is for textbooks and other non-fiction books that have an orientation toward teaching people how to do things (like how to cook). The name is derived from WikiWiki and textbook. Hope this helps. :) --mav 08:56, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Karen. Cooking recipee have an encyclopedic value. If not for you, there is encyclopedic value for some cultures. The fact there is another wikiproject where you would like recipees to be visible, is not a valid argument to entirely strip this encyclopedia from all its recipee. I might understand that we do not become a whole repository of all the recipee in the world, but at least could not we preserve part of the information ?

Each time you move information there, we lose information


 * 1) we lose access to the information, since there is not even a link preserved to wikibook. That means, here, the information is just plain lost. Note that since the page is deleted, that means it is very likely a new author will come one day to create a new article on the topic, hence duplicating the work load. Note as well, that deleting the article is likely to be offending the author of the article, who will not find *any* reference to it
 * 2) you also break all the international references, since other wikipedias consider recipees valid information. We do not have link to refer to
 * 3) we lose links to typical recipees that are examples of a cooking style or cooking techniques. This is another loss
 * 4) we lose very interesting google hits which would attract women, and mothers.
 * 5) we deceive travellers, who very likely would like to read about famous dishes.

All to say, I would like to discuss with you the fact recipees are deleted from this place. I am absolutely unfavorable to such a scheme. I would be please to hear counter arguments.

Proposition :
 * 1) keep here famous recipees, or those relevant to a technic, or style of cooking
 * 2) let's not delete pages, but rather do a redirect over there, or better put a link in the page, to preserve information and international links

Anthère0 12:17, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Karen, keep on doing what you're doing. Some, maybe all dishes, have encyclopedic value, but their recipes do not. The wikipedia article on Apple pie should tell what an apple pie is, where it was developed, why it's culturally significant, and then link to the recipe at wikibooks. Keep on transwikiing stuff to wikibooks, and thank you. Gentgeen 15:57, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * And above all Gentgeen, DO NOT PAY attention to the fact their is no clear consensus to move all of them and to delete the initial articles. Be careful to remember it is more important to do what you feel is best, rather than to guess other people may have different opinions. Very important, eh :-) Anthère0

Recipe moving
As you can see, moving recipes to wikibooks tends to get touchie. People can get very emotionally attached to particular recipes. It is important that they know that the recipe is not being deleted, just that the content has been moved to another wikimedia project. Additionally, it is very important that when a recipe section is moved from an article that remains, such as crème brûlée or pumpkin pie, that a link to the recipe at wikibooks be included in the article. If you have any questions or comments, feel free to make them here (I'm watching this page for now) or at my talk page, or possibly at m:Talk:Transwiki, though I don't go to meta as often as I'm here or at wikibooks.

Thanks, Gentgeen 02:00, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

My response to all this.

Moving recipes, or ANY article is a two-step process. Nothing whatsoever has been deleted. But it was decided NOT BY ME that recipes should be placed in a recipe book at the Wikibooks site. Since I was working on the recipe book here, now I am working on the recipe book there. And to get the recipe book there requires a long and tedious moving process. So I started moving a few things. The move process is not complete. Once it is, then there will be links... for now, I can assure you that I have deleted nothing whatever, and the only recipes I listed for deletion here were recipes with no 'extra' commentary' on them whatsoever, and also no links to anything else in the wikipedia other than the 'recipes index' page. I'm not 'breaking' anything, and only following what I understand to be official policy - the note on the recipes index page SAYS they're supposed to be moved across.

If you don't want me to do it then FINE. It took me an hour just to transfer four recipes last night and now you're jumping down my throat about it. I don't have time for this crap. The recipes are not 'disappearing' from anywhere - you can go and read them at the cookbook any time you like, once I've given them a page (which I was about to do). KJ 04:05, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Sorry Karen, I didn't mean to sound like I was jumping down your throat. I'd just like to suggest that you link to the page in the transwiki namespace when you move the recipes out of articles.  The link will follow the redirect left at wikibooks to the page's eventual perminant location, and the users of those pages will know where the information has gone.  I'm sure I'm like you when I say I'd rather just get the pages where they need to go rather than fight with those who's first exposure to the move of recipes is the sudden "deletion" of their grandmother's favorite pie recipe.  I also appriciate that these moves take a long time (which is why I haven't done any in a couple of weeks), so I appriciate all the help you can provide.  I think I'll get some moved over tonight.  Thanks, Gentgeen
 * It wasn't you doing the jumping Gentgeen! You have no need to apologise. I really did think that I was doing the right thing because it says right there on the page that the recipes are supposed to be moved... and then Anthere tells me off. Argh. For the time being I think I'm going to stick to fruits and vegetables, where nobody has told me that I'm 'not allowed' to use info (I'm copying some from here and using it as a base for a more culinary article...) KJ 04:48, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. I did one or two for the spices earlier. Gentgeen

I apology for making you feel like I was jumping on you. You are doing an important job in moving the recipee, and should not just stop just because I ask you to do so. But the fact is, I believe some recipees are culturally and technically important. Some people will look for them because they are some classics, because tourists just come back from a trip in a specific country will really want to do themselves this very special and famous treat. Or recipee can be used as a support to explain some cooking technics (such as pâte feuilletée).

The fact you move recipees is fundamentally ok with me. What is not ok is that in some cases, no links have been provided whatsoever to the cooking book. So in effect the information is just lost. Worse, when some articles like ratatouille are just proposed for deletion, the whole information of what that dish is, and its relevance to a certain cooking culture disappears as well. Not only is there no more link to a recipee, but the very notion that dish exists just disappear from Wikipedia. People will type the word in the search box, and see that there is nothing (if the article is deleted). This is very bad.

For any important dish, an article must be kept (a stub if you wish) AND a link to the recipee preserved.

Now, I have the feeling this has been done for many dishes, though not for several french dishes. I do not say it was done on purpose against french food; however, I would not be surprised that if those moving the recipee are able to recognise which british or american dish is famous and relevant to the description of a certain way of life, this may not be the case for french cooking. If so, I would hope that you will accept my own expertise on the matter, when I tell you that not preserving recipee links for Coq au Vin or crêpe, or plain deleting ratatouille is bad; and that these articles are important to our folklore. I hope my position is clearer. Thanks Karen.

Gniezno
Why did you move the Gniezno article to Gniezno, Poland? Are there any other cities named Gniezno or is it just you idea on place names? Anyway, could you possibly move it back to where it belongs? Halibutt 10:59, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

WikiProject Melbourne
Hi, Karen. Seeing as you've listed yourself at Wikipedians/Australia as being from Melbourne, why don't you drop by the WikiProject Melbourne and help add something to the Wikipedia about our city?

Be sure to visit the Project talk page, and if you are interested, you can become a member.

TPK 13:54, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC) (My talk page is at User talk:Hypernovean).


 * Thanks for joining up! Drop by the talk page sometime. You may also be interested in the Australian wikipedians' notice board. T.P.K. 13:07, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

License
Hi, I'd like to know the license of your pictures. We use Image:Echidna.jpg on french wikipedia so can you confirm it is GFDL ? Thanks in advance. Tipiac 22:05, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * And also Image:Palehydrangea.jpg Tipiac 20:56, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * And then Image:Figtree.jpg. Please drop me a line when done, thanks in advance. Tipiac 12:52, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Also, Image:Peahenandchicks.jpg. RedWolf 19:28, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)

My photos and copyright status
You've changed this place so much that I don't know how or where to put this any more! (but it looks great...) I just popped in from a link on the Distributed Proofreaders (my latest public works project), and I notice that a bunch of my photos are listed as 'questionable copyright status'. I don't know what boilerplate is needed but I took the photos myself (or my brother did) and of course they were freely donated to the wikipedia! KJ 07:39, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Karen, if you licensed them under the GFDL, just put a tag on them. Gentgeen 07:54, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I found the image tag list page... it looks like the most appropriate (well, the most appealing to me as the photographer) tag is so that's what I'm putting on them. It says that they can be freely used for non-commercial purposes as long as I get credit as the original photographer. Is that okay? KJ 08:03, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Then they will be deleted. Read for more information: http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-May/023760.html
 * They're your images, you can release them under any license you like. By the way, welcome back!! Gentgeen 08:06, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gentgeen! It's probably just a flying visit but I'll hang around long enough to try and find all my images and fix them. I'd hate to think of them being deleted after I went to the work of putting them there! KJ 08:10, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for those photos! I've added them into the article. Ambi 01:39, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The Rocks images
Just noticed them. Great work, and good pictures! - Ta bu shi da yu 09:21, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

octopus image
Do you know what species is shown in Image:Reef2063.jpg this image you uploaded? - UtherSRG 12:57, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:


 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. – Ram-Man (comment) (talk)  13:55, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Manx (cat)
Your help is needed. Check the talk page for more information on what's going on with that article.
 * EliasAlucard|Talk 12:15, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)

Show cats and genetic health problems
I noticed that you have edited a section of the article show cat regarding the frequency of serious health problems in purebred cats. There is currently a discussion on the talk page about this section as to weather the article should state that this is a problem (the position I have taken) or weather the article should state that this is a misconception which is not true. Your input would we appreciated. Dalf | Talk 23:31, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Sywell
I have now started this article off as it clearly needed it! Brookie: A collector of little round things 16:47, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Image:Blackswansnesting.jpg has been listed for deletion
Currently has a non-commercial CC license.

Image:Australian correa.jpg has been listed for deletion
Also Image:Centrepointtower-sydney.jpg. dbenbenn | talk 23:48, 21 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Also Image:Therocks-sydney1.jpg, Image:Therocks-sydney2.jpg. dbenbenn | talk 01:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Also Image:Australianpinkheath.jpg, Image:Australianredheath.jpg, Image:Banksia1.jpg, Image:Banksia2.jpg, Image:Boulder.jpg. dbenbenn | talk 07:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Jackrussellterrier.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Jackrussellterrier.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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.

Image copyright problem with Image:ListerGrave-SleepyHollowNY.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:ListerGrave-SleepyHollowNY.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 20:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Help!
This user, User:Abu badali, keeps on trying to delete fair use images that I've uploaded, especially Image:Allison Mack1.jpg and Image:Kristinkreuk1.jpg. I have gotten permission from the websites owners to use these images, and I have written a detailed fair use rationale for both of them, and they both have the fair use tag on them. Even after a lengthy discussion, he still will not accept that they are fair use and he keeps trying to delete them! Loooking at his talk page and his contributions, he seems to think that he is the highest authority on all things "fair use", but he obviously is not. Can you please help me, or get some other administrators to help me, convince him that they are in fact fair use images and should not be deleted? It would be greatly appreciated, and he must be stopped before he lists every single fair use image for deletion. Thank you. - Ivan Kricancic 03:34, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Marigoldthumbnail.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Marigoldthumbnail.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify 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 file 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 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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - SCEhard T 03:12, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Greykangaroolying.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Greykangaroolying.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there 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 its not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 16:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Babyleatherbackseaturtle.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Babyleatherbackseaturtle.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there 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 its not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 16:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Eucalypt
Eucalypt has been proposed for deletion. NickelShoe (Talk) 20:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Survey Invitation
Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 22:02, 3 March 2007 (UTC)talk to me

A new page
Hello dear... what is your opinion about this new page I made about the biography of a young journalist from Iran? Kourosh Ziabari - Sate Journalist

Fair use rationale for Image:Arachnidstartingscreenshot.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Arachnidstartingscreenshot.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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. —  Κ aiba 23:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nightbloomingcactus.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Nightbloomingcactus.jpg, 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. Thank you. Papa November 20:01, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mangroves.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Mangroves.jpg, 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. Thank you. Papa November 20:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Calabrese (band)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Calabrese (band), because another editor is suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add db-author to the top of the page. -- Swerdnaneb 06:32, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Calabrese (band)
Calabrese (band), an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Calabrese (band) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Calabrese (band) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Calabrese (band) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Swerdnaneb 19:03, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tasmaniandevil.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Tasmaniandevil.jpg, 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. Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Moles
As an established editor of the article Mole (animal), your input is solicited on the Talk page to help resolve an ongoing dispute as to the nature and scope of the article. Chrisrus (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Karen Johnson! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 23:46, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Bill Whelan -

Suspension of admin privileges due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 21:46, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Melbourne meetup
Hey all, just a reminder that there's a meetup tomorrow at 11am in North Melbourne. There are more details at the meetup page. Hope to see you tomorrow! SteveBot (talk) 04:39, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Notice of change
Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that you will not longer be able to request restoration of the tools because of your prior inactivity. You have until December 30, 2012 to request restoration or else the policy will prevent you from doing so in the future; you would need to seek a new WP:RFA. Until December 30, you can file a request at WP:BN for review by the crats. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

(delivered by mabdul 23:32, 3 December 2012 (UTC))

Meetup invitation: Melbourne 26
Hi there! You are cordially invited to a meetup next Sunday (6 January). Details and an attendee list are at Meetup/Melbourne 26. Hope to see you there! John Vandenberg 05:34, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Victoria)

Proposed deletion of York Chocolate


The article York Chocolate has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No reliable sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ɖ⊝כ⊙þ Contrib.  02:00, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Arts and crafts listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Arts and crafts. Since you had some involvement with the Arts and crafts redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 19:14, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Do you want to collaborate in the edition of Jessie J's page?
Hi, I'm JD3rulo. The thing is that I'm a huge fan of Jessie J, I have made changes in her page, but other users have removed them, replying that the links I referred to don't belong to reliable sources. So I'm wondering if you could dedicate part of your time in helping me to fill some topics that are abandoned, such as Jessie J's vocal type, range and also writing updated news about her career lately. I hope you can help me, cause it seems Jessie's page has been forgotten. If you need some help to write about any article or making research, you can count on me, so this is the only thing I can give you: my friendship to make wikipedia a better and updated site. Chao, have a nice day!JD3rulo (talk) 09:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Collard greens


A tag has been placed on Collard greens requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from mtv.com/artists/collard-greens/biography. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Jaaron95 (talk) 09:32, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Jupiter(planet) listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Jupiter(planet). Since you had some involvement with the Jupiter(planet) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Pern for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pern 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/Pern 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. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:57, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

"Index of flowers with entries in the Wikipedia" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Index of flowers with entries in the Wikipedia. Since you had some involvement with the Index of flowers with entries in the Wikipedia redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Regards, SONIC  678  17:51, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Thanks for making an article on kittens (or kittehs if you are a meme maker)

JaduaGreatest12 (talk) 19:29, 14 March 2021 (UTC) 

"Moggy" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Moggy and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 28 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:00, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

"Spine(anatomy)" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spine(anatomy)&redirect=no Spine(anatomy)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 22:45, 29 December 2023 (UTC)