User talk:McMarcoP

Orphaned non-free image File:Man stars-Lunan.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Man stars-Lunan.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:40, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:25, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:HalDuncanInk.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:HalDuncanInk.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Melesse (talk) 03:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi; as I mentioned on the image's talk page I am working on the article at the moment, and it is in my sandbox - image and all. I guess I will be uploading the whole page in a couple of days. McMarcoP (talk) 11:38, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The article has been created (see Ink (novel)), therefore the file is no longer orphaned. I have removed the "orphaned" tag. McMarcoP (talk) 14:54, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Help wanted from Italian speaker
Hi McMarcoP. I am randomly messaging a few users listed at in the hope of getting input into a disagreement on the OR noticeboard regarding the use of an Italian language source. The basic question is whether a particular source can or cannot be used to support particular article content. Users currently involved in the discussion (me included) do not have a high level of proficiency in Italian, so a little help would be appreciated. If you have the time to spare, thanks in advance and the discussion is here: No_original_research/Noticeboard.--FormerIP (talk) 22:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi - apologies, I was off the 'net for some days. I will give the whole thing a check. Thanks for asking! McMarcoP (talk) 10:21, 4 January 2011 (UTC) Hmm, now that I checked... what are you looking for exactly? Sorry, I don't get what kind of assistance you need. McMarcoP (talk) 10:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Lunan
I notice your intense interest in DL with numerous substantial edits. Greetings. Two suggestions.

1. In regards to the potential fact that Sighthill was a regular solstice and summer fair site, the sentence as written now uses the citations as direct support. However:

1A) the K Herald quoted DL, and this is not the same as establishing its historicity directly, or even serving as an opinion independent of the subject of the BLP. That is, the citation does confirm that DL said it, but the K Herald author did not arrive at a position on the issue of historicity itself . I apologize for this pedantry, but the distinction, while small, is nonetheless only fair to reflect in WP if we are to be NPOV. I propose that the sentence be modified to something that reflects the degree of evidence within that K Herald source, namely something that confirms that DL said this but that doesn't itself arrive at a position on historicity.

1B) The problem with the G Herald citation used to support the same sentence is that the header abstract that the G Herald makes available simply is totally inadequate due to severe truncation of content. I am not an abrupt editor and I would be loath to remove the citation, but I respectfully wonder if you could consult the source and see whether it does in fact quote DL or on the other hand take an affirmative stance independent of his viewpoint that the site has a confirmed historical usage? If so, please provide me a courtesy academic quotation accurately reflecting the sources punctuation (quotation marks may be the key tipping variable) that allows a fair NPOV assessment of the level of evidence.

1C) The http://www.sighthillstonecircle.net/briefhistory.asp web site does include a written quote from DL on the matter, but is framed as "In later research, I found that summer solstice fairs had been held on the Summerhill, from which the midsummer Sun rises over the true Sighthill, until they were stopped by the church in the 17th century." It doesn't come across as the focus of the article or anything like its main interest which is much more to do with the interesting technicalities of how the site was initially selected and with his work at correcting issues of astronomical alignment and so forth. In any case, the rules of WP (with which I am not in complete stellar alignment but with which I try to see my way to fully accommodate without selling my soul) would speak to this self-written piece as "non-citable" in the BLP if used to characterize the BLP personality... but see below...

In the interests of arriving at a solution, I offer a first proposal on this matter, as follows. "Lunan has written that the clear sightline to the sky and a fine view of the city center met the project's objectives. He has reported subsequent personal research that disclosed that midsummer bonfires were lit and solstice fairs were held on this location until the 17th century when these historical activities were banned by religious institutions. article ref 7 and 38." Sentence 2 is supported by the K Herald quote. The G Herald cite would be discretionary, dependent on its actual content (unless contradictory!) The first sentence is a gentle paraphrase of his message, is not a direct quotation, and is not presented as such, but does mirror how he introduced the matter. It can be could be fairly supported by citing ( http://www.sighthillstonecircle.net/briefhistory.asp ) and I think is permissible as a reference to the contents of an author's corpus, rather than as a personal characterization of the BLP subject himself. While it is a matter of opinion and discretion as to what is and what is not allowable in terms of "proximity" of sourcing in a BLP I think this is quite reasonable under any standard.

2. Actually why don't we get the easy one out of the way first? Then perhaps we can work out my second tendentious question.

3. Oh, and in the grand scheme, can we gradually work to get these ugly monster boxes off the top of this article?

RespectfulyFeatherPluma (talk) 20:03, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for contacting me on the topic. I agree with your first point, you are welcome to make that update (unfortunately I won't have time to sit down and work on WP for long in the next two or three days, I can do it on Monday however, if you prefer). And yes, I have been trying to find a way to remove those boxes (short of simply removing them, of course), but I'd like some guidance. The fact that Lunan himself occasionally butts in and updates the article without sourcing his statements doesn't help either. Thanks for your interest! McMarcoP (talk) 07:33, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Red Link Recovery
Hello. As a Italian-speaking WikiGnome, I'd like to solicit your help in testing a new tool. For a few years now, the Red Link Recovery Project has been using the Red Link Recovery Live tool to track down and fix unnecessarily red links in articles. Recently, the tool has been expanded to work on non-English Wikipedias. A small set of suggested fixes for red-links on the Italian-language Wikipedia have been prepared and I'm hoping to interest some Italian-language speakers (such as yourself) to work through them.

If you are interested, please visit http://toolserver.org/~tb/RLRL/quick.php?lang=it. Each time you refresh the page you'll be presented with three new suggested fixes. I'll be happy to answer any questions on the tools talk page. - TB (talk) 20:05, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Devil&#38;DeathDuncan.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Devil&. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:23, 8 November 2011 (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) 13:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo2 rugbymania.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Logo2 rugbymania.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:45, 30 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Looks like the article has been deleted, therefore I see that the image has to go as well. If the article is ever restored, I'm sure it will be uploaded again. Thanks. McMarcoP (talk)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ghost club logo.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:Ghost club logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:52, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:DB - Strange Light.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:DB - Strange Light.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:30, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:DB Drawing room 2.jpg


The file File:DB Drawing room 2.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Orphaned file with no obvious value in transferring to Commons"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing 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 files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Salavat (talk) 03:09, 17 October 2020 (UTC)