User talk:Neelix/Archive 8

Orphaned non-free image File:Cornerbrook.JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:Cornerbrook.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 will not be able to answer your questions.


 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.


 * If you received 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 somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:49, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Harbourgrace.JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:Harbourgrace.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 will not be able to answer your questions.


 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.


 * If you received 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 somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:26, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Green-backed


The article Green-backed has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This isn't a real disambiguation page, neither of these targets are known as "green-backed". Disambiguation is not for partial title matches.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fences &amp;  Windows  01:31, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Halloween Template
Actually, you have to not revert and start a discussion. Per WP:BRD, you were bold in making a change to the template. It was reverted, and you should have immediately started a discussion about the potential change. There is no policy or guideline that says that link must be on the left, and aesthetically, it's not even that nice to see. So, it is your responsibility to start a discussion and try and persuade the people who created the template, and who have worked on the template that moving it to the left is the better option. Otherwise, you're trying to claim that you should be able to change it, and that I have to find a consensus to change it back. That isn't the case. The consensus must be found to make the change in the first place.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  23:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Don't warn me, you've reverted as much as me. Secondly, per WP:BRD it is your responsibility to start a discussion. You do not have any consensus to change the template, and I don't even see a discussion. Where is this discussion that you've supposedly started? It isn't at Template talk:Halloween series, where is SHOULD be. Where is it? You said you started a discussion and that I didn't take part in it, because you never informed me of where it was. I contacted YOU, on YOUR talk page. You never responded on the talk page. Actually, you archived it without a response. You haven't contacted me on my talk page about it. So no, you have not started any discussion with me about it, and if you started one somewhere else please show me where you notified me of the discussion. As such, you have no consensus for your change, and you have no policy or guideline to even support your viewpoint. I don't believe it looks better the way you placed it, I don't believe it makes it easier to access for readers, and I know that there is no policy or guideline stating that it should be there. So there are my rebuttals, which I have told you before in prior communications. So, until you start a real discussion, at the proper location or actually show me where you supposedly had the old discussion so that I can see some actual consensus, please do not change the template.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  14:53, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Just for your courtesy, Template talk:Halloween series - here is a discussion that has been started, which is what you should have done originally.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  14:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I was only aggravated by the statement that you had started a discussion and that I had not responded. I assumed that you had started one somewhere else and just never notified me of that discussion. I went ahead (see above link) and started a centralized discussion. I'll post a request for comment at WP:FILMS and WP:HORROR for additional opinions, as I'm not sure how much attention we'll actually get on the template (simply because there just isn't a lot of regular activity on it).   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  16:18, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


 * P.S. I have no hard feelings. Here are links to all of the notifications I posted (WP:FILMS, WP:HORROR, Halloween (franchise) page, and WP:NAVTEMPS) so that you can hopefully verify that I left objective, neutral requests for comments.   BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  16:24, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Dave Padden
Hello Neelix, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Dave Padden has been removed. It was removed by Michig with the following edit summary ' (deprod - as a member of two bands that we have articles on, PROD is not suitable. Merging would seem more constructive anyway) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with Michig before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 14:22, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Request for speedy delete of Lesly
A tag has been placed on Lesly, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Rejectwater (talk) 15:13, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Liquidator (Darkwing Duck)
Hello Neelix, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Liquidator (Darkwing Duck) has been removed. It was removed by Nyttend with the following edit summary ' (All the other characters have articles, so this really shouldn't be deleted except by AFD) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with Nyttend before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 08:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 08:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Sordid
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 11:32, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added and, also created by you in 2008, to the above discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:42, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

List of The Adventures of Tintin characters
Sorry about the "minor" issue. I clicked on it by mistake and saved the page before I could reverse it. Again, my apologies.--Marktreut (talk) 16:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help regarding Animaniacs
I appreciate your help in merging the Animaniacs characters I appreciate your help. I was wondering if you could help me I am trying to clean up many of the Masters of the Universe articles but its tough doing it by myself. These are the ones I think need most attention List of She-Ra: Princess of Power characters I nominated a few characters to be merged that article.

I think Horde Trooper should be merged to Evil Horde and Zoar (He-Man) into Sorceress of Castle Grayskull.. Your input would be most appreciated. Dwanyewest (talk) 17:50, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Waterloo Road
Hi there Neelix. Just noticed you responded to my comment about my decision to defer from the Waterloo Road article, and I just wanted to wish you good luck with it. :) ShedMediaUK (talk) 21:01, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Since you are good at it
Could you fix this my little pony template Template:My Little Pony Dwanyewest (talk) 22:33, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks once again for sorting out Masters of the Universe articles I hope if you don't mind sorting out Darkly Dawns the Duck Dwanyewest (talk) 18:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

re: Your comment at ANI
Cheers, and thanks for your openness on the issue. I'm glad your account was not actually compromised. When you come back from your Wikibreak, would you mind tagging some of the other redirects that were likely inappropriate with db-g7. Hope the weather is better where you are, and you're making good use of the time away. Cheers. ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 14:49, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Welcome back! ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 17:14, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Blue-necked
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Blue-necked. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Blue-necked. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Linux For You
An article that you have been involved in editing, Linux For You, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ahunt (talk) 18:32, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Belgariad Location Merge
I wish to notify you that I disagree with the recent merge of the individual locations in the Belgariad. Each one should have it's own page. Please contact me.--Stephen C Wells (talk) 18:51, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry if I seemed a little angry. It's just, I'm new here and wasn't aware of the debate. I personally think that they are notable enough and I'll try not to sound rude in the future. Thanks.--Stephen C Wells (talk) 19:17, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh. This has nothing to do with the issue, but I hear you made the Warriors series template. I've read those books and enjoyed them, fairly much. I didn't even know they were covered on Wikipedia (although I should have guessed!)--Stephen C Wells (talk) 19:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Quick question. You mentioned turning the Geography in The Belgariad and The Malloreon page into a featured list. Well to tell you the truth, and I'm being honest about this, but I have no idea what a featured list is. Can you enlighten me please?--Stephen C Wells (talk) 19:26, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Zhou Zhiruo
Hi, please see the talk page and join in the discussion on deletion of the article. Thanks. 暗無天日 contact me (聯絡) 05:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Offshoot Films


The article Offshoot Films has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links: Offshoot Films – news, books, scholar Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Abductive (reasoning) 09:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I improved Chang Chong-Chen
I have added reliable sources for Chang Chong-Chen so I don't think it needs merging although I believe C.O.P.S. For Kids needs sorting out. Dwanyewest (talk) 04:12, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

moved Talk:Realism (visual arts) to Talk:Realist visual arts (Disambiguators are for disambiguating from separate concepts, not subcategorization.)
A very bad move, which should certainly not have been done without a debate. The "rationale" makes no sense, and the move goes against all naming conventions, inventing a phrase never found & virtually meaningless. What are "Realist visual arts"?? There's no such thing. Realism is a historical movement in the visual arts, as in other branches. This would have been obvious if you had looked at the article. Please reverse and, if you want, initiate a debate. Thank you. Johnbod (talk) 23:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I imagine the theatre people feel much the same about your move there. Johnbod (talk) 23:39, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for List of Tom and Jerry characters
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 18:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 17:15, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, would you be so kind as to give us support! Na nga def?
Hello, I hope you're doing fine and I sincerely apologize for this intrusion. I've just read your profile and aside from seeing that you're a learned person I saw that you show a real interest for Africa and especially Senegal, so you understand what are minorities, a minorized language and culture and maybe I am not bothering you and you will help us... I'm a member of a Catalan association "Amical de la Viquipèdia" which is trying to get some recognition as a Catalan Chapter but this hasn't been approved up to that moment. We would appreciate your support, visible if you stick this on your first page: Wikimedia CAT. Thanks again, wishing you a great summer, take care! Ba beneen joon! Capsot (talk) 20:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

You must get sick of hearing from me!!!
I need your help I created an article called Prostitution in Cambodia but it got merged by accident to Prostitution in Asia the original article has multiple sources if you wanna check it out do you know how to unmerge stuff? Dwanyewest (talk) 00:32, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

List of Redwall characters
Did a bit of tidying up. What do you think? Half Shadow  20:40, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Haven't read the books in years; just edited it in passing. It seemed pointless to state the characters were from a specific book if they were listed under it. I left a couple since they were in multiple books. Half  Shadow  20:52, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Chiefohara.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Chiefohara.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Happy Neelix's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

You have my permission
Could you create archives on my talk page you have my permission to edit my talk page. Dwanyewest (talk) 23:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Why not merge or redirect?
Neelix, you're starting quite a few boilerplate AfD's on fictional topics, yet you list a mergeist userbox. Any particular reason you're asking for deletion, as opposed to just BOLDly merging or redirecting the content you find unnotable? Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 17:31, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Kamen Rider Dark Kabuto
Hello, this notification is to let you know that the article Kamen Rider Dark Kabuto, which you proposed for deletion, has been restored as the prod was contested on my talk page. If you would like to further pursue the deletion of the article, the next step would be WP:AFD. Thank you. — ξ xplicit  04:50, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bloom Field
A tag has been placed on Bloom Field requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Bluemask (talk) 16:11, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Mask,


 * I was on a wikibreak when Bloom Field was deleted. As I am not an administrator, I am unable to view that page's history. I think it unlikely that I would have created an article with blatant copyright infringement. Would you mind looking into the page's history in order to determine the original purpose of my creating a page under that title? While I do not recall the form of the page as I created it originally, it appears to me that it should exist as a redirect to the Bloomfield disambiguation page.


 * Neelix (talk) 15:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

User page vandalism
Hey, I got to your user page via browsing the Wikiproject Islands talk page, and I noticed that your user page was vandalized, so I rev'd it. cheers, Marcipangris (talk) 16:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Bette Porter
I see you merged Bette Porter, but some IP reverted. Where's the discussion that decided the merge? I was going to revert the IP's edit, but I couldn't find a discussion on WP:AfD or the article's talk page... GorillaWarfare talk  21:49, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Kamen Rider Dark Kabuto
Before you go through with the deletion, again, let me give you the same reasons why it should not be deleted that I told User:Explicit when I requested that he undo the prod. The fictional character is notable as he has appeared in a notable television series (Kamen Rider Kabuto), was made into not one but two action figures, one of which is part of a limited run of popular characters and one of which is a standard release. In addition, the character appeared in another television series three years later (see and and ) and also is a playable character in a recently released video game. Now before you go through AFD, please consider this.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 20:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Bombings in Mogadishu
-- Cirt (talk) 06:02, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Template:Kamen Rider Decade
While I appreciate the attempt to clean up the template, the original formatting is the preferred method of dealing with organizing the templates in the series. In addition, you removed the mention of "Kiva-la" in the template for reasons you did not elucidate upon. It is practice to include a link to every Kamen Rider who is a primary character or is unique to the series, even if they only appear in the films, for which they are only given a section on the corresponding film's page unless they appear in more than one film and at that point they get their own article. The "Other characters" section in these templates usually includes a link to the antagonists of the series, but Decade was unique and this section only points to the three character lists. In addition, the link doesn't work that well against the colored backgrounds I've set up. If you have a better formatting style, I would like to see it otherwise.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 19:41, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Ryulong,


 * The current format of the Kamen Rider navboxes is contrary to the generally accepted format for navboxes. Navboxes are supposed to contain as little non-linked text as possible; the colons after the section headings are superfluous and should be removed. Navboxes should also contain no duplicate links; there should not be a link to a section on an article when a direct link to the article is already included. Navboxes are for grouping related articles, not for presenting information; that is what articles are for. As such, a link to Kiva-la should not be included simply to make the list of Kamen Riders complete; that kind of information should be relegated to the content of articles. Navboxes should also be as compact as possible; there is no need to have two sections listing characters when one line can contain all the necessary links. As for the character list link not showing up well on the background, it can always be switched to black in the same fashion as the Kamen Rider Decade link at the top of the navbox.


 * Neelix (talk) 23:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay. So we're doing it differently because frankly we can. Please do not modify the template, again, or modify any of the other templates. There is nothing that says we can't have a separate line for the primary characters/protagonists from the secondary characters and antagonists. There's nothing that says the templates can't be as they are.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 23:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi Ryulong,


 * It is important for navboxes to be as simple as possible; it improves navigation, which is the purpose of navboxes. I outlined my reasoning for each of the changes I made above. You have not justified the alternate format you have imposed. "Because frankly we can" and "Well, we're doing it differently" are not adequate responses to the arguments I have made in support of the standard navbox format. If you continue to disagree with my edits, state your reasons for disagreeing here; do not simply revert my edits without explanation. I would be content for the navboxes to have a different format than the one I am suggesting if you demonstrated a different format to be more benificial.


 * Neelix (talk) 00:35, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

You made an edit. I reverted it. We talk about it. You do not repeatedly revert to your version of the template after that. Learn about WP:BRD and stop edit warring. I do not like the formatting you have put in place and it is most definitely not required that every template use the same formatting and look the same. Just leave it be or I will report you for edit warring. Your opinions do not reflect the idea of the project, and neither do mine. But this was in place for months and people were able to navigate the pages using this.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 01:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * As a third uninvolved opinion on this matter(disclaimer: I was pinged on irc), yes, I agree that templates need to be as simple as possible, but that does not mean they should not fit on the page. It is unnecessary to stretch it as farther than it is supposed to go.  Not everyone has the same-size monitor.  To Navbox convention, the applicable thread should not be on a single article talk page, but on the project page.  You should know better than to edit war, Nee, given your time here.—  Dæ  dαlus Contribs 01:47, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Osho (Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh)
I don't see any discussion for your move of Osho (Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh). That title was the result of considerable discussion on the article talk page. While the naming conventions make suggestions, Wikipedia editors are not required to follow them. I'm going to move the article back. If you're still concerned I suggest starting a structured move disucssion, per the procedures at WP:RM.  Will Beback   talk    00:52, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Crockett.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Crockett.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:46, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Template:User Salvation Army
Hi, I thought you might like to know that I've been a Salvationist since November last year. Until now I haven't been able to create a user template, (this one has been adapted from Template:User Protestant Christian at Wikisource). Please feel to use the above template on your userpage. --kathleen wright5 (talk) 11:00, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of characters in the Cloverfield universe


The article List of characters in the Cloverfield universe has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Redirect left behind by a page move.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. uKER (talk) 03:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Beaver Creek Camp


The article Beaver Creek Camp has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No secondary sources to establish notability, and I cannot find any either. Camps are not inherently notable, I believe, hence this PROD.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Drmies (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Fangschleister.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Fangschleister.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  04:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Portblandford.JPG
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Portblandford.JPG. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 21:53, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Goosebumps (Original series)
Hi D'oh,

Thank you for suggesting it! I'm really glad that editors are collaborating to better organize the Goosebumps-related articles.

Happy editing,

Neelix (talk) 05:20, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

re:Dad's Army characters
Hello - ah yes, I sortof forgot. I'm happy to do it, but you're welcome to have a go if you like. The only one I thought should probably stay as a separate article is Lance Corporal Jones, as even though the page isn't very good he is a main character. Bob talk 10:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

John Jones
I don't see how you can possibly argue that it is not helpful to have a link to the disambiguation page from articles such as John Jones (Tegid) and John Jones (Talysarn). Anyone with a bardic name is likely to be a writer, and it is most unlikely that non-Welsh-speaking readers will find it easy to tell them apart. Please give this more thought. Deb (talk) 19:48, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree with your conclusion. In my opinion, someone might easily get confused between Talysarn, Tegid and Talhaiarn and go straight to the wrong one. I also don't see how removing the hatnote is in any way more helpful than leaving it there.  Deb (talk) 11:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that re-naming is definitely not the answer. To suggest that John Jones (Methodist minister) is a better title than using the bardic name shows that (and I mean no offence by this) you have no appreciation of how many people in Wales share names and the way they are normally differentiated in the English language.  There are literally thousands of notable clergymen in Welsh history, and many of them share names, hence the need for bardic names.  Although the guideline may suggest an alternative naming convention, it is after all only a convention/guideline, not a hard and fast rule. Deb (talk) 17:13, 4 October 2010 (UTC)