User talk:Purgatorio

I am here because: I have noticed that content creation, while a worthy activity, involves significant investment of time and labor, and can require excellent conflict management skills. Moreover, there is a lot of high quality content creation already underway (and increasingly organized and co-ordinated by WikiProjects), so what little contributions I will have time for would be a drop in the ocean.

I have also noticed that the Wikipedia community generally deals well (openly, efficiently, and with a sensible outcome) with certain classes of problem, once notified - for instance, articles for deletion, suspected copyright violations or featured article reviews.

I have noticed that it deals less well in processing through the many articles, categories and images in Wikipedian "Purgatory" that may require action to be taken but have slipped through the "recent changes" net.

My main aim is not to get involved in protracted debates or to philosophize about the future nature or essential purpose of Wikipedia. I will not be found hanging out on controversial AFDs, or involved in lengthy point-by-point rebuttals of other people's views. And unfortunately I may not have as much time as I would like to perform essential first aid on salvageable articles. But by calling to wider attention issues that are more straightforward for the community to resolve I believe I will be making a worthwhile contribution to Wikipedia. Purgatorio 13:50, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Florida Photographic Collection
Please do not send me any more messages about deletion of these articles. Consider myself warned. I commented to that effect in the template's deletion Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_6. I have asked an admin numerous times to deal with the problem after I received the first message from another user. They apparently did not have enough time to deal with the problem. I volunteered to help if that's what it takes to resolve the problem. Royal broil 18:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I would GREATLY APPRECIATE if you were to do whatever is appropriate with these images. As you can tell from my tone, I am frustrated. I left a message on the talk page of the second admin to delete the template. I used a stronger tone than here, and I expressed that I was frustrated. It's bad enough to feel the loss of dozens of hard to find good images (even if justified), but it's painful to get messages over and over about it. Cheers! Royal broil  20:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Let me know if you want me to mark images that I uploaded for speedy deletion. Royal broil  20:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Would you help me with fair use criteria for the following photographs:


 * Image:C022795.jpg
 * Image:C015986.jpg (more to follow)

Assist needed
I'm still getting notices from User:BetacommandBot about rationale even though the below tag is placed on the image and discussion pages. Example: Image:Goodwood Plantation rc04488.jpg. As you probably know, the Florida Memory Project template was discarded leaving many images either deleted or with notices.

What can be done? Need help from an administator. Noles1984 15:58, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Florida Photographic Collection
Thanks for the reply. I seem to have solved the problem by identifying photos that are PD. Fair Use - there is no possible way of finding a duplicate since they are one of a kind. Also I've included publish dates and author if "the collection" has that information. If they do not, I stipulate so. It's the bot that attacks with no way to look at rationale. Noles1984 14:22, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It's the photos that are say from the late 1920s through 1950s-early 1960s which are one of a kind. People are dead, property/buildings torn down or renovated, etc. It's based really on uniqueness of subject and if that subject can be retrieved with a camera. Noles1984 15:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Puerto Ricans Missing in Action
Hey Purgatorio, that is an interesting user name. Don't tell me that you are always in a "Limbo" (smi;e). All joking aside, your recommendation is a valid one and what I did was rewrite the whole sentence like this:

"In September 1952, the 65th Infantry was holding on to a hill known as "Outpost Kelly" until the Chinese People's Volunteer Army (Chinese officials maintained from the first that the Chinese fighting in Korea were volunteers) which had joined the North Koreans, overran the position."

It was great that you pointed it out, you're doing a great job. Tony the Marine 18:26, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:HMS Hood and HMS Barham.JPG
Hi.

I am no expert when it comes to images and copyright issues on wiki. Unfortunately I do not have much of my naval books to hand so I couldn't tell your where it might be sourced. The two images on the HMS Hood page I claimed as free-fair use images. I simply noted the source and hoped for the best. The last picture of Hood was later modified by user: Dennis, to show that they were taken over 50 years, and as a result are now in the Public domain.

I suspect as this image, that has no doubt been taken more than 50 years ago, will fall under that blanket also.Dapi89 17:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

On warning users
Greetings! First, any user can warn a user who is vandalizing. There are a number of templates at WP:TUSER that can be applied. Actually, I'm about to apply the following messages to Ian Garrigan's account:, to give general information about how to contribute to Wikipedia, and , a good-faith "Hi, your edit worked, but in future, contribute under the guidelines" message. (When applying such a warning to a user's talk page, make sure to substitute the template, e.g..

As a general rule, WP:AIV is for users who have received a final warning (like, which advises them that they can be blocked for continuing) yet continue to vandalize even after the final warning. Users can also be reported for other extreme edits, such as spamming several articles a minute or extremely racist or otherwise attack-oriented vandalism.

That said, it's certainly better to call it to somebody's attention than let it go unnoticed. As I said, I'll warn the user--and his talk page will wind up on my watch list, so I'll see if he gets any future warnings. —C.Fred (talk) 01:33, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Pooch cthulhu.jpg
I know you deleted Image:Pooch cthulhu.jpg (thanks) - but now it's back! There's an inappropriate fair use rationale listed on Wikipedia (it's not a book cover, and there's no commentary on it in the article it's used in) but the image itself is listed on Commons as GFDL... I've tagged it for deletion there also. Is there an appropriate process for persistent uploaders of copyright material? At the very least, the uploader could do with having a good read of copyright policies here and on Commons, but with the multiple warning messages that have been sent already, it's not as if nobody's pointed the user in the right direction already... regards, Purgatorio 19:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I deleted it again; there was no image, just text. If s/he tries again we can deal with the fair use rationale stuff. I don't see how it could be fair use though, in any case. About warnings/process: if the user continues to upload, s/he can eventually be blocked for disruption.
 * Where is it on Commons? If it hasn't been deleted already, let me know. I'm an admin there also. (I'm not very active, but I have the tools.) --Fang Aili talk 00:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

62 War
Greetings. I've responded to your query at. All the best, – Quadell (talk) (random) 01:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:CPView.JPG
Back in early November, you left me a message about contradictory image tags on this image. One was an attribution and one was a fair use. I have now found a message on the developers website simply saying the software is freeware. If that isn't enough then perhaps the fair use rationale should stay. crandles (talk) 19:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:Non-free promotional discussion
Hello, Purgatorio. Since you recently contributed to the lively deletion discussion for Template:Non-free promotional, I thought I'd let you know that I've continued the discussion about this template at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. The result of the deletion discussion was to keep the template, but there are still some questions about whether the current template serves a useful purpose and how to prevent its misapplication. Please contribute to the discussion if you are interested. —Bkell (talk) 17:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry!
I just realised I forgot to get back to you about the Bermudian cricket team in the Netherlands in 2007 note you left me on my talk page; I was having a busy few weeks at the time and got round to fixing the error you spoke of but forgot about getting back to you. Sorry about that! Anyway yes, it was a c&p error; thanks for bringing it to my attention. :) Regards, AllynJ (talk | contribs) 18:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Evene.fr
A tag has been placed on Evene.fr requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Schuy m 1 (talk ) 22:07, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Nomination of Evene for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Evene 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/Evene until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Rathfelder (talk) 19:44, 25 November 2019 (UTC)