User talk:Nickydab

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 11:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 12:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Owen Keys
I have added a "" template to the article Owen Keys, 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). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. M URGH  disc.  12:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edits to Quiff
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. M URGH  disc.  14:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Owen Keys email
Thank you for the personal email appeal, I'm not used to it, so allow me to answer here on the public discussion page. To start, let me assure you that deleting Owen Keys isn't something I will do or pursue, but due to a certain scrutiny of policy on WP, it may well happen. Maybe more rigorously now than before, articles are screened and if they don't meet the criteria, removed. In the case of the Mr.Keys article, attribution is the main problem, and even more so when the article is about a living person.

Having done your university dissertation on the subject you must appreciate the need for dependable sources, and this is what the WP aims to be, a collection of widespread believable, retrievable sources, woven together into articles of pedagogic utility. A terciary source based on secondary sources. Without the sources, there is nothing to distinguish if an article describes a fantastic event or an imaginative hoax, undermining WP's function as a useful tool in the future.

So no, the phrasing isn't the problem, but lack of citation is. If the Owen Keys article was constructed reversely, i.e the sources laid down, the text constructed based on what is cited elsewhere and "provable", the appearance of believability would have been greater. But this way, there is no knowing if it is a true account, slanderous or fiction. You may be aware of the story of Bonk?

At any rate, Mr. Keys' notability needs be established before his quiff can be listed among notable wearers of quiffs, and his image (superfluous in that another image represents the quiff actually described in the article) be featured. Good luck, M URGH   disc.  11:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:Modernquiff.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Modernquiff.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 19:39, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Badquiff.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Badquiff.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 19:40, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Modernquiff2.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Modernquiff2.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 19:40, 27 May 2007 (UTC)