User talk:Myleslong/Archive 4

{| cellspacing="3" align="center"
 * - valign="top"
 * width="100%" class="MainPageBG" style="border: 1px solid #8888ff;-moz-border-radius: 22px;"|

Shelley Sekula-Gibbs, Houston City Council member and candidate for Congress from Houston/Sugar Land
Please review the debate on this article for deletion and provide your opinion please: Articles for deletion/Shelley Sekula-Gibbs. Thank you. --Getaway 22:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for voting.--Getaway 17:39, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem on voting. Take care. --Myles Long 18:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Chrome Division
The band above has been deleted, though I heavily disagree with the poor reasons given. I have been discussing the situation with another person who edits music articles, namely Spearhead, so both our pages will give you an idea of the situation. Geni is the admin who deleted the article, citing the fact the band has only released a single album as a sufficient reason for deleting the article even though WP:MUSIC states that "Failing to satisfy the notability guidelines is not a criterion for speedy deletion", something Geni has ignored. LuciferMorgan 21:44, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks like this has been settled. Sorry for the delayed reply.  --Myles Long 18:47, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It's ok, thanks for the help. LuciferMorgan 20:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Witchfinder General
Hal Raglan has requested a peer review of the Witchfinder General article but has not received any comments. I reviewed the article for him shortly before he nominated it as a Good Article. He posted a message at the Horror Wikiproject talk page, but to no avail. Would you mind critiquing the article for him if you have the time? I'm sure he would appreciate it. Dmoon1 17:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look at the article. As you suggested, I removed the redlinks. If you can think of anything else that might make this a better article, please let me know.Hal Raglan 03:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * If possible, could you take another glance at the Witchfinder General article? I self-nominated it as a Featured Article candidate two days ago and not a soul has bothered to Support, Oppose or Comment on it.  I'm not sure if this means that nobody at all has any interest in the film or not, but it seems bizarre to me that every single one of the FA candidates submitted AFTER Witchfinder have received massive votes and/or editorial commentary.  So I'm soliciting your assistance.  If you believe the article currently meets the FA criteria, could you vote accordingly?  And if you think it definitely needs further work, any suggestions would be appreciated.  Thanks.--Hal Raglan 16:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your vote of Support for the article!Hal Raglan 23:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Prince
Someone reverted my edits when I attempt a reference cleanup at Prince (musician). At first I thought he edited a mistake I did so thanked him but on closer inspection noticed he reverted my edits, though he may have thought I had been vandalising. The user is Relir - you can check the edit history. If nothing more happens then consider it a misunderstanding, though if the problem persists I will get back in touch. LuciferMorgan 19:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Festival Bay Mall
I have to day I was surprised to see you were an administrator given your single word keep "vote" on the above page. We made disagree as to the nobility of the article, but providing no support for you "vote" is a weak contribution to the discussion. I came to your page to provide some advice, assuming you were a newbie, but you seem well versed in wiki policy. Just surprised.--Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 17:03, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your concern. I left a single word there because I'm a lazy bastard, hah.  Seriously, I thought I'd left a more compelling argument, honestly.  I'll add a comment to that discussion.  --Myles Long 17:13, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Keeping per Silensor
Hi, I noticed that on a few AfDs you have kept per Silensor(and his essay) and in those AfDs I had also posted a link to my rebuttal essay. I was therefore wondering if a) you had read my essay and b) if so what you found less than persuasive in it. The essay again can be found at User:JoshuaZ/Schools. Any comments would be appreciated. JoshuaZ 17:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Filmmaking announcements
Just thought I should let you know that I've reverted your recent addition of the Witchfinder General FAC from the announcement box for reasons which will be apparent upon perusal of the project scope - we don't cover individual films. Please contact me if you have any disagreements with this. Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola 20:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I see your point. However, Portal:Film indeed does highlight individual film articles under its "Feature Content" section.  Thus, I would assume that those perusing the portal (where the film project's "to do" list also appears) might be interested in commenting on that film's FAC. --Myles Long 20:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Myles, that's the whole reason for portals existing - so that interrelated projects and articles can have a common access point. However, the article falls outside of the scope of the particular WikiProject, so it should not be placed there. It would, of course, be fine in both WikiProject Films and the Film Portal. Thanks! Girolamo Savonarola 19:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Umm, yeah, that's the point. I'm well aware as to the reason for portals existing, thanks.  I put it on WikiProject Film's "to do" list, or at least I think I did.  Ahh, now that I look at it, I see that both projects' "to do" lists are on the portal, my mistake.  --Myles Long 19:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

FYI
There has been some discussion on Articles for deletion/El rancho charter school which may interest you. JoshuaZ 01:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey
I edited the 'chicken suit' page because I didn't know how to go about telling you guys that I wanted to recommend it be deleted. You just reverted it without sending me anything helpful to help me resolve the matter, which was useless and incredibly ignorant of you. If you could tell me how to nominate the 'chicken suit' page I would be grateful, or if you could do it yourself, but I shouldn't have had to ask twice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.103.147 (talk • contribs)
 * Sorry for the delay, I was about to post this message on your talk page, along with the above welcome message. To answer your question, to nominate an article for deletion, follow the steps outlined here.  --Myles Long 23:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Misattribution
You have, I assume inadvertently, used the unsigned template to incorrectly attribute a statement to a well-known and respected editor, when in reality it was actually made by an unregistered user. I trust you realize how seriously someone is liable to take it when you "put words in their mouth", so to speak. I've since corrected your mistake, but please be more careful in the future. --Michael Snow 23:44, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

RfB With A Smile :)


Requests for adminship/Elonka
Thank you very much for your support in my RfA. Unfortunately consensus was not reached, and the nomination was not successful. However, I do appreciate your comments, am still in support of the Wikipedia project, and will continue to contribute without interruption. Thanks again! --Elonka 17:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Coodergraw.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Coodergraw.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Chowbok  ☠  03:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Subspecies (film series) character section
Why did you redirected the characters?--SGCommand (talk • contribs) 16:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you're talking about. I only edited Subspecies (film series) once, and that was to move it to where it is now for consistency with other film series articles.  If you can clarify what you mean, I might be able to answer. --Myles Long 18:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Michelle Morgan --SGCommand (talk • contribs) 21:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Lubbockhigh.jpg
The website from which this image was taken states specifically that this CC image can not be used for commercial purposes. This is not equal to the ShareAlike 2.0 license with which you have tagged this image. Please correct this conflict or consider removing the image. As I understand it, all Wikipedia's images (except fair use) must be available for free use, and this image is not. Rklawton 01:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Black Moment of Panic
I have added a "" template to the article Black Moment of Panic, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Oo7565 08:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Removed prod template; single by notable band released on notable record label, seems to meet WP:MUSIC. --Myles Long 17:03, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

List of media personalities who have vandalised Wikipedia
It looks like the deletion police are trying to circumvent a previous AFD again. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:List of media personalities who have vandalised Wikipedia. As you voted keep, could you cast your vote again? - Ta bu shi da yu 23:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Mudge.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mudge.jpg. I noticed that 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, then 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, then 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 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 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 18:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ysangkok (talk • contribs).
 * Whee. --Myles Long 00:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Mudge.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Mudge.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 16:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:example.jpg
Hi. I noticed that you restored Image:example.jpg. You seem to be using this image several places in your user space. Non-free images cannot be used outside of article space. Please see Fair use #9. Thank you. --BigDT 03:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Help Resolving a conflict
I have read the pages about this on wikipedia and I have came to you because you seem to be a person who knows how wikipedia is supposed to work and are most likely 100% neutral on this matter. I am involved in a rather intense edit war with two other editors of the article Miriam Rivera. In the last days the user User:Jokestress has quite reasonably asked for the article to be backed up with more reliable sources. Well I found them and that seems to have placated her. She has acted in 100% reasonable way in all of this. The problem arises in that she has asked in the spirt of resolving the conflict we were having other people who are not 100% neutral it seems to comment on the matter. These being the user User:Longhair and the userUser:Alison in particular who have not bothered to justify anything that they have done. Longhiar being an admin seems to feel no need to discuss anything and I feel is abusing her powers. Is there anything you can do? --Hfarmer 04:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Removal of categories in TTU people articles
Thanks for cleaning these up. I'll use these articles as a reference when adding categories in the future. --Wordbuilder 00:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Daily toreador front page.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Daily toreador front page.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.

I replaced this one with one that represents more of the campus (i.e. Will Rogers and Soapsuds Statue with rainbow). So, I tagged this for deletion since it is orphaned fair use. Wanted to give you a heads up in case you disagree. --Wordbuilder 04:54, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. --Myles Long 17:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

"Thanks for linking to a disambig"
Hi! You made this edit on Back Orifice 2000 with the edit summary "thanks for linking to a disambig". I presume (please correct me if I'm wrong) that you meant those 'thanks' ironically, in reference to my prior edit, which removed the extra link to CULT OF THE DEAD COW and linked the abbreviation cDc instead.

cDc is not a disambiguation page, it is a redirect; and if I read read the guidelines correctly, there's no need to 'fix' the link as you did. Maybe I just don't understand what you meant or maybe you weren't aware of this guideline (in fact, until I looked it up just now, I didn't know a guideline existed either way), but I just wanted to bring this to your attention.

By the way, I've now changed the link to  which has the added benefit that the title of the link (tooltext if the mouse pointer hovers over it) explains the abbreviation. I actually feel that this may be a justification for 'fixing' a link to a redirect, if that redirect is for an abbreviation, and I may just propose this on the guideline's talk page sometime soon.

Regards, Oliphaunt 02:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You're right, I said disambig but I actually meant redirect. CDC is a disambig, that is what I was thinking of (please note the same spelling but different capitalization).  My mistake.


 * However, given the same "redirect guidelines" that you are referencing, there was no need for you to "fix" the link, either, as CULT OF THE DEAD COW and cDc both redirect to Cult of the Dead Cow. Thus, there was no reason for you to make a change.  I see from this diff that the "needlessly yelling phrase" (your words) wasn't actually linking to a redirect, but that's beside the point, as it could have (and probably should have) been, since a redirect exists at the spelling/capitalization used.  The "phrase" (not technically a phrase, as it's the name of a group) you're referring to isn't "yelling," either; that is the proper spelling/capitalization of the group's name, regardless of wikipolicy. --Myles Long 18:47, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * When I looked at the article Cult of the Dead Cow before making that first edit which you responded negatively to, I failed to note that the name of the group is / should be spelt in capitals. Also I only saw afterwards at its talk page that there's been a bit of a discussion about capitalisation of the name, so I understand now why you were less than pleased with my edit (and its summary).  I won't enter into the debate about the capitalisation, but at least now I understand your point of view.  Since I wasn't the first editor who changed/removed the all-caps, I probably won't have been the last either; I wish you wisdom and some peace of mind in that discussion.  All the best, Oliphaunt 10:37, 12 May 2007 (UTC)