User talk:Kuliwil

Answered: When is a newspaper worthy of a Wikipedia page?
I know a few local papers (in Victoria, Australia) that do not have Wikipedia pages, but there is a large number of local papers that do have pages. Most of those papers were started pre-1950 - is there a rule as to how long a paper has to be established before it has a Wikipedia page? What other requirements are there?
 * If the newspaper meets the general notability requirements, it can have it's own article. If you find an article that doesn't meet those requirements, feel free to nominate it for deletion. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @  14:15, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you!  K u l i w i l  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kuliwil 14:40, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Answered: Correct Wikipedia Date Formatting
I have a question. What is the correct formatting of dates in English Wikipedia? I have seen several formats, including "...on the 11th November, 2009, kuliwil asked...". I deem this as incorrect as I believe it should read "...on the 11th November 2009, kuliwil asked...". I have not adjusted this on articles, however is this acceptable? I mean, how should dates be written in Wikipedia? Is it country-specific so Australian dates on Australian pages are written differently to those on US pages? Thankyou for your time. -- K u l i w i l  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kuliwil 04:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no actual standard, but yes, in general, country-specific topics should use that country's format. See WP:DATE for the *very* comprehensive listing. But as long as you are consistent in the article, it should be fine.--  fetch  comms  ☛ 04:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Russell Broadbent on The Warragul Citizen's Agora program, April 2012.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Russell Broadbent on The Warragul Citizen's Agora program, April 2012.jpg, which you've sourced to TV screenshot. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the 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 CC-BY-SA 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 , 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 take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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 File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File 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 created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  Ron h jones (Talk) 21:36, 28 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks Ronhjones! The advice on email proof is incredibly helpful! -- K u l i w i l  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kuliwil 14:39, 30 June 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) 14:02, 24 November 2015 (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) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of B.l.o.w. for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article B.l.o.w. 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/B.l.o.w. 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. N Ø  07:17, 13 November 2018 (UTC)