User talk:Narky Blert/2015

U half me 01307170263 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.32.144 (talk) 08:04, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Your experience with Wikipedia so far
Hello Narky Blert,

I am conducting research about newcomers to Wikipedia and I was hoping to ask you some questions. I’ve noticed you’ve had some good activity recently. Is there any chance you have time in the next month to speak with me? If you are interested or have any questions, please email me at gmugar [at] syr.edu or leave a message on my talk page.

I hope to be in touch soon,

Gabrielm199 (talk) 23:47, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of human genes on chromosome 1


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on List of human genes on chromosome 1 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Legacypac (talk) 05:53, 11 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Category:Chromosome 1 gene stubs contains 829 entries. Many of them are orphans. This page would allow all those orphan tags to be removed (and I can't think of a better way of doing it). Narky Blert (talk) 12:34, 11 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm going to defer to the more experienced New Page Patroller who nominated other pages below. GOod luck. Legacypac (talk) 13:02, 11 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your reply. It makes clear sense that all the pages should be considered together. Narky Blert (talk) 14:52, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of List of human genes on chromosome 12 for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of human genes on chromosome 12 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/List of human genes on chromosome 12 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 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. Legacypac (talk) 05:54, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of human genes on chromosome 8


A tag has been placed on List of human genes on chromosome 8 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
 * disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:20, 11 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Category:Chromosome 8 gene stubs contains 259 entries. Many of them are orphans. This page would allow all those orphan tags to be removed (and I can't think of a better way of doing it). Narky Blert (talk) 12:43, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of human genes on chromosome 9


A tag has been placed on List of human genes on chromosome 9 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
 * disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:21, 11 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Category:Chromosome 9 gene stubs contains 315 entries. Many of them are orphans. This page would allow all those orphan tags to be removed (and I can't think of a better way of doing it). Narky Blert (talk) 12:44, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of human genes on chromosome 17


A tag has been placed on List of human genes on chromosome 17 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
 * disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:06, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Category:Chromosome 17 gene stubs contains 476 entries. Many of them are orphans. This page would allow all those orphan tags to be removed (and I can't think of a better way of doing it). Narky Blert (talk) 12:45, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of human genes on chromosome 10


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on List of human genes on chromosome 10 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Snowstormer ( T • C) 15:39, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of human genes on chromosome 3


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on List of human genes on chromosome 3 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Snowstormer ( T • C) 15:39, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

A trout for you for duplicating information at Whacking with a wet trout
Rui &#39;&#39;Gabriel&#39;&#39; Correia (talk) 09:52, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Irwin Craig
An article that you have been involved in editing, Irwin Craig, has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 04:37, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Congrats... You asked an awesome question in the Teahouse!


License tagging for File:HMHB-EditorsRecommendation.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:HMHB-EditorsRecommendation.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Based on your question at WP:MCQ about this image, you may find it useful to read my image copyright information page, or just ask me directly as I work with many such issues here and on the commons too. ww2censor (talk) 11:22, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your speedy reply. (1) The use of the image (most likely its only one, a low-res scan of an album cover) strikes me as fair use under 17 USC 107 of any copyrights in either the original artwork or the digital scan, so I don't think that is an issue. (FYI I own that album, and the sleeve does not credit the creator of the artistic work.) (2) I tagged the talk page of the image when I uploaded it with Non-free album cover. Is that the correct tag and location? (3) Should I also add and fill in Non-free use rationale album cover somewhere? (4) Should I tag in some manner the article in which the image is used? (5) An example of good practice with some randomly-chosen album cover could be helpful, a picture being worth 1000 words etc. (I have learnt not to copy, hoping for the best, what other editors might have done; an experienced editor had to point me towards Manual of Style/Layout.)


 * I doubt I'll be uploading many images; though I do know a good source for the labels of some early 78rpm singles. Regards, Narky Blert (talk) 19:44, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Generally album covers can be uploaded for the article about that album only under our much stricter policy of WP:NFCC. We do not accept any image under the US legal interpretation of fair use, so you should not concentrate on it and focus on NFCC. I've linked the above two templates for you, so you can review them for details and you do require both of them. Here is an example File:Radio Clash.jpg of a album image which has been properly filled in. Look at the details in edit mode you see how the templates are filled in on the file page, not the file talk page. Generally it does not matter if there is a copyright notice or not. No need to tag the article, just add the image code to the infobox. BTW, such non-free image should be about 300 pixels at maximum but if not just tag the uploaded image as and a bot will deal with it in a day or so. I hope I have answered all you concerns. If not just drop me a talkback on my talk page or ping me. ww2censor (talk) 22:27, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you, most helpful. I've added the,  and  templates to the image page, and a signed declaration as to why I consider the use fair. I've also deleted the tag on the talk page. I have not deleted the  template, preferring that my work be approved first. Regards, Narky Blert (talk) 17:29, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


 * TY again ... getting there I hope ... I'll try not to trouble ImageTaggingBot again in the near future ...
 * I forgot to say in my previous post: the 300x300 restriction looks thoroughly sensible, and is useful to know about. Narky Blert (talk)


 * I reveiewed the image again and removed both the deletion tag and the unnecessary declaration; the rationale IS your declaration. There is lots to learn and even after 9 years I learen new things every so often, so just ask if you have other questions. It's not a problem. You can always add the helpme template to your user page if you want assistance but directing a request more directly is probably better. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 10:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

John Ireland
Hi. I'm just wondering if it would be appropriate to use "(John Ireland)" rather than just "(Ireland)" as a disambiguator for this composer's works. Not that anyone with any level of musical knowledge is likely to get him mixed up with the country, but it's a more ambiguous name than most famous composers. Just a thought, really. Deb (talk) 15:25, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Excellent point - especially for works with widely-used titles like Prelude and Piano Concerto. It would be less than helpful if a passer-by categorised articles on his works under "Ireland" or "Irish music", for example! I'll use your disambiguator in future.
 * As for existing articles, I'll rename-move the relevant items in Category:Compositions by John Ireland, updating the "What links here" articles as I do. It seems to me that leaving behind the "(Ireland)" redirect pages should be harmless enough.
 * Your idea has been used at least once before - Coronation March (Edward German). Leave the "Edward" out, and that would be a really ambiguous title! Narky Blert (talk) 15:58, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Very true! I had overlooked that one. :-) Deb (talk) 21:03, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I think I've now rename-moved all the existing "(Ireland)" articles to "(John Ireland)", and upgraded the relevant articles to the new link. I didn't touch the usertalk/bot/etc links to the old page, because (1) I don't like messing with those and (2) anyone who makes one should have some sort of idea as to what they're doing. I think the redirects from "(Ireland)" (now essentially orphans) should stay.
 * Ireland was a minor master, but very prolific. He deserves his 15 minutes. I got me a fun project, pointing anyone interested towards scores/recordings/texts - which is the intention underlying my recent tiny Wiki articles on his works - that, and populating categories for the same reason. Narky Blert (talk) 22:06, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. I love articles like this. Deb (talk) 06:12, 2 May 2015 (UTC)


 * The problem with the above discussion is that it's one that the entire classical music wiki-community has a stake in, yet it's being conducted (up till now) as a private discussion between 2 editors, and I hope they don't think that whatever agreements they may have come to amount to anything like WP:Consensus.
 * I have only now been made aware of this discussion, and only because I've reverted some page moves that were made by Narky Blert without involving anyone other than Deb, and without any indication that this discussion existed. This is not the way to proceed, particularly where it's proposed that all the articles on a certain composer's works be changed.  (Except that the "proposal" has already been turned into a series of faits accomplis.)
 * I'm alerting Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music to this matter, so that other interested editors might have a chance to make a contribution.


 * For the record, I disagree that the Edward German case is a proper precedent for these moves. Coronation March (German) could very well read like a German coronation march, i.e. one historically used in Germany.  But what could Piano Concerto (Ireland) possibly mean, other than a piano concerto written by someone called Ireland?  I mean, does the Republic of Ireland have a National Piano Concerto, played on formal occasions preceding their National Anthem or something? Hardly.  And how many composers named Ireland are there? I know of only one.  Where's the ambiguity?  --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  21:11, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Of course! – start a discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music – copy me in, and I'll make my case there, and follow the consensus.
 * For now, I'll just add: (1) You know and I know that there is no Irish national piano concerto. Others might not. (2) Consistency. "Full Fathom Five (John Ireland)" is a needed article. "Full Fathom Five (Ireland)" would be seriously ambiguous and possibly misleading. If music articles are variously disambiguated "Ireland" and "John Ireland", non-experts might be confused.
 * I've stopped creating new articles on Ireland's music which need disambiguators until consensus is reached on this issue. I have several dozen in mind. Narky Blert (talk) 22:49, 3 May 2015 (UTC)


 * See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music.
 * We don't create Symphony No. 9 (Ludwig van Beethoven) just because it's hypothetically possible that someone, somewhere, might think that there's a notable composer with the surname Beethoven, other than the famous Ludwig, who also wrote a 9th Symphony.  Equally, we don't go looking for spurious reasons such as that someone might think there's any such thing as an Irish National Piano Concerto.  We disambiguate if and only if there's a need to do so, and then as minimally as possible.
 * In a particular case, I might be persuaded that (John Ireland) is more appropriate than just (Ireland), but that would not apply to all of his works, and certainly not to his Piano Concerto or his Sonatina. --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  23:20, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't see how reverting uncontroversial moves can be considered the right way to deal with this. Was there ever a discussion prior to the first article on one of Ireland's works being given the "Ireland" disambiguator?  I doubt it.  But I'll go along with the idea of a discussion and will contribute. Deb (talk) 07:00, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * But your measuring stick for whether these moves are controversial or not is whether you agree with Narky or not. That's one other editor.  Two people is a hell of a small sample on which to base such an assessment on.  Now there are three people discussing this, and one of them disagrees with the other two.  That spells "controversial" to me.  Soon there will be more, and we'll just have to wait and see what they think.  --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  07:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * And yet, on the basis of one individual's doubts (your own), you thought fit to revert changes that two people felt, and still feel, were appropriate, and that you yourself agree might be appropriate. Deb (talk) 07:57, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Please don't defend the indefensible, Deb. Even if a hundred other editors turn out to agree with you and Narky, and I turn out to be the sole outlier, the fact that two editors decided this matter between themselves and then acted without any wider consultation means that it was premature, to say the least.  Please read up on BOLD, revert, discuss cycle.  Narky Blert has been bold, I've reverted, and now we're discussing.  Was there some other process you feel we should be following? --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  08:28, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Requested moves
The only way to resolve this now is to go to Requested moves. We don't need to reproduce the whole discussion there, we can just cross-refer to it. Are you prepared to make the request or do you want me to? Deb (talk) 10:47, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer you to do make the request, if you will. You're an older Wiki hand than I am. You suggested the idea – but I was the one that picked it up and ran with it, and so am a directly involved party.
 * I've just inserted two short posts near the foot of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music which you might find relevant - about C. P. E., and about Mother and Child. (C. P. E. is another composer horribly underrepresented in Wiki.) Narky Blert (talk) 12:03, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * At the moment I can only find two articles that actively need moving - the Piano Concerto and Sonatina. I'm not sure whether there are others I may have missed.  Can you please confirm? Deb (talk) 12:24, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Confirmed, by looking at Category:Compositions by John Ireland and its subcategories. Narky Blert (talk) 12:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

The Oxen
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of The Oxen, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/the-oxen/.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:20, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Category:Song cycles by Arthur Sullivan
I just deleted Category:Song cycles by Arthur Sullivan based on this discussion at CFD. However, I see that you were never notified nor was the CFD listing made on that page itself. Please look it over and if you think it's wrong, I have no objection to reversing it and re-posting it with actual notice and a chance for you to make your views known. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:08, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for alerting me. I have no strong feelings. If an article is easily findable by someone browsing a higher-level category page, that's good enough for me. But ...
 * Might I draw your attention to, for example, Category:Ballets by Ludwig van Beethoven, Category:Song cycles by Ludwig van Beethoven and Category:Ballets by Benjamin Britten? There will never be more than one entry in any of those. I can envisage howls of protest were those categories proposed for deletion; but it looks to me as if under WP:SMALLCAT, they should be.
 * I question how appropriate WP:SMALLCAT is to classical music. Unless you know already, you'd never guess what types of piece Creatures of Prometheus, An die ferne Geliebte or Prince of the Pagodas might be. Pieces like the Debussy, Ravel and Verdi string quartets can easily be found under the composer's names; but if you didn't know it already, could you guess what forces Ainsi la nuit was written for? Category:Compositions by Henri Dutilleux I think categories for often-used classical forms or forces are useful.
 * I grit my teeth at the title Category:Classical song cycles, which seems to cover both collections and true cycles; but I can live with it. No, it should not be split - or we'll be forever arguing about where to categorise Schwanengesang. Narky Blert (talk) 00:20, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about any of that. I was just reviewing the CFD closure which seemed pretty straightforward. SMALLCAT has an exception for categories that are part of a large structure so I'd say that since Beethovan's pieces by category and ballets by person have an intersection category structure, even those with a single article would fit a category within that. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:22, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thinking further about the Sullivan case: the disambiguator "song cycle" may do everything necessary to help a searcher, and if so the category was indeed not needed.
 * I was certainly not suggesting any changes to those Beethoven and Britten categories!
 * I take your point about small categories which are members of two or more unrelated higher-level ones. Those can indeed make navigation easier. Thanks again. Narky Blert (talk) 14:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Friskin
Thanks for that, you might be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music/Missing articles:Bach Cantatas site!!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link! I should look in.
 * I had never heard of James Friskin until I started writing On Wenlock Edge (song cycle), in which he plays a very minor role. Hmmm ... a couple of redlinks (including an article-required one), yet more non-linked mentions ... he looks interesting, I feel an article coming on ... Google has turned up a couple of good-looking sources ...
 * Unfortunately, I can't find any of his compositions on YouTube. Of course, as soon as I started looking for him there (and on Allmusic) today, (a) I found more info, and (b) I opened a can of worms - see the talk page. I have to say I like his recording of the Goldberg's - it's on YouTube, in bits which have to be pieced together.
 * I'm still toiling away with gaps in song at the moment. Goethe-Lieder, Mörike-Lieder, The Heart's Assurance, ... Narky Blert (talk) 01:21, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Dr-c-j-johnson.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Dr-c-j-johnson.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:05, 19 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I've added a copyright status tag; I hope I've picked the right one. I have not added the "image has rationale=yes" parameter.
 * I've also added information to the rationale template. Narky Blert (talk) 11:57, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:MikeMcCarthy-journalist.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:MikeMcCarthy-journalist.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 04:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Two days? seriously? This was a good-faith upload, made on Friday 3 July, to add context to a new and respectful article. I emailed the subject of the photo, on Sunday 5 July shortly after checking your notification. Do you mean that if he doesn't read his emails on Monday 6 July, the picture will be deleted? Even if he has to consult the most likely copyright holder, The Independent, for advice?
 * Please see the talk page of the image complained about. Narky Blert (talk) 00:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

In two days, as you say, an administrator may delete the image. Note that it is a very simple matter for the image you be undeleted, if he consents to it being under a free licence - Peripitus (Talk) 01:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Danny Gaither
Hi. Altho your edit to the above article was absolutely correct, your reason was faulty. The fact that you have never heard of the Bill Gaither Trio indicates your knowledge of music is not as encyclopedic as you think. Bill Gaither, Danny's brother is the single biggest name in Southern Gospel music; certainly now and most likely forever. Removing the term world-famous is nearly always correct, as it is what we call PUFFERY. Happy editing! John from Idegon (talk) 01:28, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * My reason was shorthand – and ty, that's another useful WP link. I think we're as one. I can live with "famous", "well-known", etc - provided that the adjective is backed up by good citations. If not, ptooey!
 * Though I have to say I'm more tolerant of fan-puffery like that than I am of stuff like the article on David Gaither, which reads like a resume.
 * I had never heard of the Gaither family until I started working on Leave It There, a gaping hole in Wiki. I started from Blind Willie Johnson's and Washington Phillips's recordings – and was surprised to find that that the author is not trad., but was Charles A. Tindley. I need now to work forward to other versions – I'm on the case. Narky Blert (talk) 02:47, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Harold Franklin
Hi. In a not-so-recent post on cheating in bridge, you made reference to statements by Harold Franklin in a magazine. What is the date of the article? Do you have it? I am trying to figure out what event is alluded to by Alan Sontag, (see here). Who where the victors that Sontag refers to? Newwhist (talk) 18:26, 11 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I do have that issue of EBU Quarterly; and the citation is already on your sandbox page, at the end of my transcription of Franklin's article.


 * My copy of The Bridge Bum says exactly the same as yours. There is nothing about the results at Monte Carlo 1974 in either Bridge Magazine or EBU Quarterly 1974-75. However, I found an advertisement for it (EBU Quarterly No. 32 February 1974, pp. 12-13). "The most elegant of bridge festivals ... total prize list of $60,000 in cash ... daily sessions from 3:30 p.m. to 8 p.m, leaving ample time to enjoy the beaches in the morning and the extensive night life after the day's play. Chief Tournament Director: Harold Franklin." First prize in the open pairs was $6,000 - today worth at least ten times as much, I think. (Entry fee $40. In 1974, my salary as a recent graduate was the equivalent of $56/week. I could never have afforded to play there.) A typical French money tournament in a plush resort: Monte Carlo is a millionaire's playground. The best place to find the results might be le Bridgeur or la Revue Française de Bridge.


 * The Sunday Times was always held in London, around New Year. Facchini-Zucchelli had won the 1974 Sunday Times by a considerable margin (EBU Quarterly No. 32 February 1974, pp. 14-15). There's no suggestion in that issue of anything untoward. However, I did find an editorial in BM about F-Z at the 1975 BB, which I plan to transcribe into your sandbox. It is quite remarkably pro-Establishment and complacent, and IIRC takes a very different stance to that of TBW at the time.


 * I thought you might collect from BW that extract from Vanderbilt's formulation of the Laws, which was why I included citation details ;-) Narky Blert (talk) 20:54, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Duh! Thanks for the reminder re the Franklin article date. According to a Rixi Markus book, the Monte Carlo event was usually in June, so I will check TBW after that month 1974 onwards for a few editions. Newwhist (talk) 03:25, 12 November 2015 (UTC)


 * The same ad says that Monte Carlo 1974 was 7-16 June: open pairs 7-10, teams 11-14, mixed pairs 15-16.
 * I think I know the Rixi Markus book you have in mind. "I was playing with Prince Lobkowitz against the Grand Duchess of Gerolstein and the former King of Ruritania, disgracefully deposed by his ungrateful subjects, etc etc." Narky Blert (talk) 04:05, 12 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) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject historian and newcomer of the year awards now open!
On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:06, 7 December 2015 (UTC)