User talk:Ke5crz/Archives/2016/March

Re: Vandalism
My edits were absolutely not vandalism. Read the article, and read my edit summary. Prop 2 is mentioned three times in a terribly redundant fashion, and I boldy corrected it. I need to wait a little while so I don't break the 3RV rule, but I will be putting my edits back in. Thank you for indulging me.

71.238.69.7 18:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Reverted awhile back (Ke5crz 09:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC))

Removing Bell Operating Companies
Removing the Bell Operating Companies from the AT&T template is completely unnecessary. The Bell Operating Companies, along with the holding companies AT&T acquired are assets of the company. Removing them simply gives the impression that they are no longer a part of AT&T. The Bell System template is meant to incorporate all of the former assets of American Telephone & Telegraph, as this was a historic company. Having the Bell Operating Companies within the AT&T and Verizon templates specifies where they are today. KansasCity 20:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I love history as much as any of my fellow old-time dingalings, but am uncertain why an article like Ohio Bell ought to fill something like 80% of its page with two navigation boxes, which in turn are more than half duplicate links to the same articles. The argument against is easy for me to see:  These large and duplicative templates take up screen space (and for slow connections, time) and bring little benefit to the reader.  Well, benefit is not obvious to me, anyway.  There must be a cogent counter argument or someone wouldn't so industriously insert these things, I'm just failing to see significant benefits that wouldn't come just as well with a few words about the old days and a simple link to Bell System.  Jim.henderson 06:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:4kids updated.gif
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:4kids updated.gif. 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.

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 Non-free content, 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 11:00, 6 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 11:00, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi sir, There is no any source information, Please give it and remove the tag. Thanks!-- 07:37, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Future Web service
Template:Future Web service has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Kakofonous (talk) 00:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:4kids updated.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:4kids updated.gif. 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) 05:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Funimation-logo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Funimation-logo.gif. 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) 22:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  essay  // 03:28, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Your RfA
Dear ke5crz,

I have closed your request for adminship as unsuccessful, under WP:NOTNOW. Unfortunately, with just 1,200 edits we do not have enough information to make an accurate evaluation of your candidacy. You are encouraged to reapply later when you have more experience and have 3,000+ edits at the minimum (preferably 6,000 or more). Keep up the good work!

Best, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:32, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey - I've read your comment, I'm just letting you know that I'll post all the info later :-) (I have to run out). Hope to see you soon :). -- Addi hockey  10  e-mail 14:01, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Alright, are you interested in helping out with files from the English Wikipedia to Commons? If so, please indicate so and I can list a few jobs you could probably do. How about behind the scenes on Wikipedia? Personally, I used to be involved in WP:UAA, WP:AIV (which you already are), WP:RFPP (don't know if you're involved there), WP:ACC*, WP:SPI, WP:CSD. Those were things I helped out with, I'm not sure if you'll be interested in them or not. You could also do WP:AFD, WP:ER. The former would demonstrate whether or not you understand article policies and guidelines and how you use them in a hectic environment where both sides (Support & Oppose) usually bring good points. The latter doesn't really show your personal editing skills, but it shows your skills to access peers and to give constructive criticism.


 * I hope you found this helpful, if not, leave me a shout :-)


 * * At ACC we currently have enough users and there is no particular backlog, so we generally don't accept new ACC users with few edits, so whether you're interested or not I cannot guarantee that you'd be approved or denied of access to the tool. -- Addi hockey  10  e-mail 22:55, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Funimation Channel for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Funimation Channel 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/Funimation Channel 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Ke5crz (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
I don't want to spam you, but I think this is important, and would like to know your opinion. WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  22:46, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

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

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)