User talk:Melbob

AVHowell
copy at mel uni special collection. Lentisco 06:13, 28 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Hello. Do you have a persistent identifier for that photo? Is it really Ada? The Rare Book Detective (talk) 05:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Michellegrattan2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Michellegrattan2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified 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 media 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then 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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ( T / C ) 13:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Australia
Hi. I reverted you additions to the Australia page because, as true as they may be, i do not see how they are any more relevent to Australia than any other capitalist democracy, and were certainly not appropriate in the context of the sentence to which you added them. Just thought i would let you know why. Rockpocket (talk) 02:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * In case you haven't worked it out, the lead of a long article like Australia is supposed to summarise the rest, so your comments certainly don't belong in that part. Significant changes should be proposed on talk pages first, and seek consensus, providing references to published reputable sources to back up your concerns. --Scott Davis Talk 04:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Three-Revert Rule
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.--cj | talk 02:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Your opinion on people being 'afterthoughts' is just that - opinion - until you can garner a consensus from other editors. I'm sure that a vast section of the Australian jurisprudential edifice would disagree with you on your point. The very fact that conflicting opinons exist make it an issue of POV, not an issue of fact. You are in violation of the three revert rule and if you revert again I will report you. Slac speak up! 02:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. abakharev 03:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Virginia Trioli
Please stop tagging this to be deleted. Trioli is a prominent and highly notable journalist, having won two Walkley Awards, the Australian equivalent of the Pulitzer Prize. Rebecca 04:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * You're wasting your time continually tagging the article. That process requires that the deletion be unopposed, and as it clearly is not, it'll be reverted until doomsday. If you want, you can nominate the article at Articles for deletion, in which case a vote will be held, but I guarantee it will be kept resoundingly. Rebecca 04:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Ada verdun howell.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ada verdun howell.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 04:05, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded
Thanks for uploading Image:AdaVerdunHowell.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:AdaVerdunhowell.jpg. The copy called Image:AdaVerdunhowell.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 02:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Melbob! 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 insure 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) 19:42, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Evan Whitton -

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:AdaVerdunHowell.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:28, 9 December 2013 (UTC)