User talk:Sable232/Archive 2

South Dakota Highway 127
Right now you started up with this page. You mentioned the source but please cite the section or any statement for which mentioned the source. Sushant gupta 03:25, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

68.224.84.185
Is there a reason this is vandalism? The rest of this user's edits seem to be legitimate. --Wafulz 03:39, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, but next time I think it'd be better if you started off with test1 or verror1 rather than test3. I think that's why the IP exploded on you. --Wafulz 03:46, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Userbox
I thought you may be interested in this userbox.

Karrmann 22:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Old MN shields
Do you have specs on the two old MN Sheilds so SVGs can be made in the Commons? Also per my reply - revert whatever shield change I made - sorry for the mishap.--  master_son  Talk  -  Edits 22:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The plain white square shield was adapted from one of the others here (maybe Maryland's, I think?). I used the Type D font. The "MINNESOTA" was 66 point, I can't recall the size for the number I haven't seen an actual sign from this period, I'm just basing it on Riner's interpretation.
 * The 1954-prior star shield I made from scratch. An example of the actual sign (in yellow) is here. As you can see, my representation isn't quite that good anyway. I'm not quite sure how Inkscape works, so I'm sorry I can't be of much more help. I do know that the last time some of my PNGs were converted to SVGs, it took a few tries to get them to look right at 20px. --Sable232 23:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I was afraid this would happen. The new SVGs you made don't show up correctly at 20px. --Sable232 19:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Which ones in particular? --  master_son  Talk  -  Edits 19:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What's wrong with them? I had to fix MN 93 though since I forgot to convert text to path, so if you purge the image, it will be better. --  master_son  Talk  -  Edits  20:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm, they look fine now. --Sable232 20:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

MN 93
May I propose splitting this article into two?

one for the current route and one for the former route - with disambiguation links between them? The fact that two infoboxes exist on an article makes it look awful. Thanks. --  master_son  Talk  -  Edits 19:58, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I really don't like the idea of having two stubs instead of one. Automotive articles have multiple infoboxes, one for each generation. We don't split those articles up, I don't see a problem with having both routes in one article. --Sable232 20:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Not a prob - considering the size - lets leave it. but leave the possibility out there for future expansion possibilities. 8) -- <span style="font-variant: small-caps; color:#006600!important"> master_son <sup style="font-variant: small-caps; color: #aca607!important;"> Talk <sup style="font-variant: small-caps; color: #aca607!important;"> - <sup style="font-variant: small-caps; color: #aca607!important;"> Edits  20:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Hoaxer
His initial username was User:Teddy.Coughlin. he isn't blocked though, so I don't know why he keeps making accounts. Karrmann 20:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I say you report him to the admins. Mainly because he keeps adding hoaxes, and is doing it under who knows how many sockpuppets. Karrmann 20:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. I have Twinkle, so I'll report the sockpuppet. Karrmann 20:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, he would add false info to articles and create hoax articles. It seems that he uses the socks purely to create hoax articles. Karrmann 20:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Ford Taurs
This car is no longer in production and I do not appreciate being threatened

Your recent edits
Hi! Please don't leave vandalism warnings for edits that are not vandalism. See here. If you had attempted to engage the user in a friendly manner, while assuming good faith, you would have realised that the user is well-intentioned, if not a bit mistaken  gaillimh  Conas tá tú? 01:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I can definitely see your point, and the user was clearly mistaken, but it was a genuine attempt to help out Wikipedia, and it's never good to "scare off" new users with undeserved vandalism warnings  gaillimh  Conas tá tú? 01:59, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

He's baaaaaaack
The hoaxer is back, under ANOTHER suckpuppet. He just recreated the Saturn Avaze article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Karrmann (talk • contribs) 12:42, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

USRD Newsletter - Issue 5

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — V   6   0     (Bot?)    干什么？ ·  VDemolitions  ·  啤酒？ 02:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, ok
You were undoing an edit made a while back. I thought you were undoing that one revision made by BD. Karrmann 21:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a shop manual
I've read through the information you linked (thank you), but it still doesn't explain why some individuals have such a problem with including paint codes. And what do you mean exactly by "shop manual"? The G20 is no longer produced, and as such, that information is no longer available through a dealer. I happen to think that the colors available for a given year/trim/model are just as important as the engine options. Just a quick browse through some other car articles revealed some "shop manual" information you might be interested in deleting...such as the VIN letter designation for each engine offered in Chevy S-10s or the handy "abridged option" table on the Bonneville site that indicates ABS, traction control, and passenger/driver airbag status. Your "shop manual" argument is spurious at best. So again, I'd say that we should quit holding a particular article up to the "standards" of very non-standardized articles. --MackOSU 21:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Interestingly, the two 'model' articles you linked are two obscure cars of little or no consequence on the American car market. Fittingly, no "breach of standards" has cropped up within these two examples - the Tagora was manufactured for 3 years in France, after all - not exactly a 'popular' car today.  By the way, I don't think there's anything wrong with including the various trim options for the Bonneville article...that was my point - that if someone wants to take the time to include such detailed (and accurate) information, then why remove it?  Is it taking up too much space?  I mean, who's to deem that information "unneeded"?  And, could someone please address the irony that car articles in and of themselves are mostly unencyclopedic?  I'm afraid that some folks are too busy trying to enforce "standards" without really giving the information in question full consideration.--MackOSU 02:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Taurus wagon
You can see the reply on Karrmann's talk page. I'm nearly sure it's a second-generation. IFCAR 00:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Template Generation Gaps
I know you feel that generation gaps make templates look cluttered, but in the case of the Chevrolet timeline, generation gaps can be very useful. For example, the 2008 Malibu is a completely different car from the 2007 Malibu, sharing only the name and size classification. Leaving out the generation gaps makes it appear as if vehicles ran relatively unchanged over the life of the nameplate, while putting them in shows each individual vehicle while still allowing the reader to see the lifetime of the nameplate.

Even though the spacing can be affected (especially in the case of the Monte Carlo that is shown for only one year), I really believe it is informative to show the generation gaps when available, especially after seeing them on many other timelines. —Denimmonkey (talk • contribs) 17:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I cleaned up the template greatly (located at User:Denimmonkey/Template:Chevrolet, removing false generation gaps that were probably placed by over-zealous editors. The template now maintains spacing when the screen resolution is lowered.  I also rejoined the chevy/geo counterparts since geo was always ran (and eventually absorbed) as a part of chevy. Further, I removed duplicate names (such as the Aveo/Aveo5 name that I added) and seperated the Beretta and Corsica since there was room for separation.  I believe the end product is much more simplistic than before while still containing all the information it had before.  With your approval, I'd like to replace the current template with this one. —Denimmonkey 19:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Tagging
I've removed the tag from Bob Innes, as it certainly isn't an A7, nor a non-notability, candidate if he played for the national team. Just letting you know so that you can AfD it, if you want.  Daniel Bryant  00:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

SmackBot
Why does SmackBot add "date=" to a maintenance tag when it's not needed? For example, has the same function as , as far as I can tell. It seems a waste to have SmackBot making these changes. --Sable232 14:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Sable. Most cleanup templates that take a date use "date=" but a significant few use (used) the default parameter, it is very hard for editors to remember which are which (I find it hard, and I work with these templates a lot).  For that reason "date=" support is being added to the templates which didn't support it, such as Orphan, and over the course of time these should migrate to only using "date=". SB has traditionally added or taken away the "date=" as required, this will become simply adding "date=".  The default argument then becomes unused, unless the template is re-written. I have to day fixed up several hundred articles where the default argument (which stood for the date) had been used as a "reason" field or contained "article" as other templates default arguments can do, as well as the normal crop of wikilinked dates, quoted dates,  misspelled dates etc., some of these problems should go, when the transition is complete, and the syntax will be easier to remember.  Hope that explains what's happening. Rich Farmbrough, 15:35 19  April 2007 (GMT).

USRD Newsletter - Issue 6

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 22:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use promotional images
Thank you for adding the tags to correct the "Fair use promotional images" to the images that I have uploaded -- CZmarlin 04:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 7

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — Vsh Bot (t • c) 19:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Image ID
I am very keen at identifying cars, and i can often see little details that give away the model year. Though I admit, sometimes i guess. But I do think it is better to give a year instead of a range of years, it makes it look a bit more professional. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Karrmann (talk • contribs) 13:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

Orphaned fair use image (Image:77Marquis4dr.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:77Marquis4dr.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. BetacommandBot 06:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 8

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — Vsh Bot (t • c) 19:04, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Captions for logos
I concur with your summary that the edits by User:In1984 are counter productive. It seems that Wikipedia guidelines are very clear about this topic. I have tried to explain it with every inclusion of "this logo is a logo" that this editor has made. They do not even seem to care or want to read their own talk pages. Now they are expanding this editing to other brands of automobiles. It is a waste of time for everyone. Yes, someone should do something to stop this. Thanks --CZmarlin 02:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Mercury Monterey
Earier today I created a page for the Mercury Monterey minivan. I changed the link on the Mercury Monterey car 2 times so far so rather than being directed to the Ford Freestar, people will be directed to the new page I created. 2 times it says you changed the link back to the Ford Freestar. Please do not do that. The Ford Freestar is not the Mercury Monterey and shouldnt be on the Freestar page. The link to the Mercury Monterey minivan is Mercury monterey(minivan). Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.34.44 (talk • contribs)

Mercury Monterey
Well Sable had you told me this BEFORE you started threatening me with blocking my account than maybe we wouldnt have had this disagreement. Rather than starting in on the threats maybe next time you could be a little more polite and just say we do not want a separate page for the Monterey rather than threatening to block my account from editing. As far as Im concerned what you did was threatening and uncalled for and if you EVER threaten me again over something this I will request Wikipedia block or delete your account. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.34.44 (talk • contribs)

Response to Sable
First off, you NEVER put anything in the first edit summary saying that there was a prior agreement. Dont lie just to cover yourself. Second, what you did send to me WAS a threat. In your response to me you clearly say "What YOU posted can also be considered a threat as well." The last 2 words in that sentence were AS WELL, meaning you acknowledge that what you sent me was a threat. And lastly, what I sent you was not a threat, but a promise. If you do threaten me again I WILL request your account be blocked or deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.34.44 (talk • contribs)

Sable
I know I will have your account blocked/deleted. All you have done so far was threaten and intimidate me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.34.44 (talk • contribs)
 * Right now, your chances of this succeeding are zero. Please leave this editor alone already. They were quite justified in posting the original delete3}} template on your talkpage - I checked. Please try to work with other editors here, and assume a certain [[WP:AGF on their part rather than going after them as you are right now - A l is o n  ☺ 20:23, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Apparent crusader/vandal
Looks like we've got a bit of a crusader on our hands. Ab7fh seems to be trying hard to promote his website, a discussion forum related to certain Ford-built SUVs, by inserting it in as many articles as possible despite repeated deletions due to enthusiast forums falling outside the guidelines for appropriate external-link inclusion. Yesterday he began taking his crusade to inappropriate areas by asking the fatuous and disingenuous question of why external links are permitted in Dodge Dart but not in Ford Explorer, Ford Ranger, etc. I attempted to explain the differences between adding bona fide external links and promoting one's own site, between external links that comply with Wikipedia guidelines and those that don't. He does not appear willing to understand those differences, and today deleted all the external links from Dodge Dart. I have restored the links, none of which is an enthusiast forum, and admonished Ab7fh not to repeat the vandalism. It looks like others have also tried to educate this individual without success, including you, so I suspect he will attempt an edit war. Let's try and contain this problem before it grows larger, shall we? --Scheinwerfermann 04:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but I'm drawing a blank. ANI is...? --Scheinwerfermann 05:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 9

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — Vsh Bot (t • c) 16:43, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:79salon.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:79salon.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).

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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:40, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser
Read the sections for the third generation model and why it was discontinued, it is teeming with POV, and reads like something out of the Car and Driver editer's columns. Karrmann 02:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 10

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — Vsh Bot (t • c) 04:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

An important letter
Dear roads editor,

You may have noticed some changes at WP:USRD lately. Some of them, like the cleanup templates and the stub templates, have been astounding and great. Unfortunately, others have been disturbing.

This has become evidenced by the departure of a few prominent editors at USRD, a few RFC's, and much fighting among USRD editors.

After the second RFC, many of us found the opportunity to take a step away from Wikipedia for a while--as a self-imposed wikibreak, or possibly on vacation.

The result of such introspection was that many of us were placing ourselves in a "walled garden" and on a self-imposed pedestal of authority over the roads department. Also, we were being hostile to a few users who were not agreeing with us.

In fact, IRC has been the main incarnation of this "walled garden." Decisions have been made there to conduct grudges and prejudices against a few valued USRD users with poor justification.

For this, we have come to apologize. We have come to ask your forgiveness.

In addition to this, we hope to work as one USRD team from now on and to encourage cooperation instead of the promotion of interests.

All users are welcome to collaborate on IRC, the newsletter, or anywhere else at USRD.

In the future, please feel free to approach us about any issues you may have.

Regards,

Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 17:07, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Rschen7754 (talk - contribs)
 *  T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats
 *  master son T - C
 * SonTalk
 * ( [ →]O - RLY?)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 11

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 22:01, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Dodge_Royal_Monaco_1977.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Dodge_Royal_Monaco_1977.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 fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia Talk  00:15, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 12

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 22:27, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 13

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754bot 19:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

USRD Inactivity check and news report
Hello, Sable232. We had a few urgent matters to communicate to you:
 * 1) Please update your information at WikiProject U.S. Roads/Participants, our new centralized participant list. Those who have not done so by October 20th will be removed.
 * 2) There are important discussions taking place at WT:USRD relating to whether WP:USRD, WP:HWY, or the state projects should hold the "power" in the roads projects.

Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 23:33, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Meetup in Minneapolis
<hr style="background:#fc6; border:#0cf 10px dotted;"> Minnesota Meetup Sunday, 2007-10-07, 1:00 p.m. (13:00) Pracna on Main 117 Main SE, Minneapolis, Minnesota Map Please pass this on! RSVP here. <hr style=" clear:both; background:#fc6; border:#0cf 10px dotted;"> Spam delivered by -Susanlesch 17:07, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 14

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —O bot  (t • c) 01:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Pontiac Template
Hello Sable232,

I'm not exactly sure of how to go about this, but I notice that you're a major contributor, at least, and wanted to draw some attention to the following matter:

I have entered into something of an editing war with User:Jgera5 on Template:Pontiac. I'm not sure if you're watching that page, but I've noticed that you've edited it as recently as July 13.

Anyhow, I explain the issue in the discussion section, but Jgera5 keeps insisting on making his changes.

Jgera5 is extending the template to 2010 and adding vehicles that have not been officially announced by the manufacturer (specifically a "Pontiac G7" that is supposed to fit between the G6 and G8), much less have concept photos, official names, etc.

Jgera5's source is a newspaper article from Lordstown, OH that does not cite GM, but two outside "analyst" sources. Jgera5 has edited it differently each time, vascillating between a 2009 and 2010 debut for this "Pontiac G7".

Either way, we're talking about 2010 product plans when the 2008 model year has just begun. A lot can happen in 2 years. So I wanted to get some extra input on the matter so we could better settle it.

Thanks. Rhettro76 23:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Block user 74.40.41.106
Could you please block this user, as you threatened on his talk page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:74.40.41.106)? He's been temporarily blocked for the next 48 but given his past record I don't believe that to be enough.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/74.40.41.106

He vandalized two more pages today: First he replaced Robert Lee's article with a one-line comment, and then added a hidden comment on the Jennifer Lopez article.

Thanks. Cmcfarland 22:06, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Marquis ornament.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Marquis ornament.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 23:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Marquis ornament.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Marquis ornament.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

USRD inactivity notification
You have been declared inactive at USRD. If this is in error, feel free to restore yourself to the list, but only if you are truly active at USRD. Regards, Rschen7754 (T C) 21:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Marquis ornament.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Marquis ornament.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:1972 Marquis 4dr.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1972 Marquis 4dr.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:01, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Any thoughts about this vandal?
Hi Sable. I've been reverting vandalism by 96.232.101.21, and I noticed that one of the fake cars he keeps adding to pages is the Toyota Lattice, which, as I said, is not a real car. When I clicked on the history tab for this "Toyota Lattice," I saw that the page was, interestingly enough, created by Bull-Doser. I know he's a regular contributing member of the Wikiproject, which is why this concerned me. I don't want to point fingers, but do you think he could be involved with this ongoing vandalism? Jagvar 22:13, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Marquis ornament.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Marquis ornament.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Marquis ornament.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Marquis ornament.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:County 152.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:County 152.png, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the 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. —Angr 15:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Marquis ornament.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Marquis ornament.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. —Angr 15:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Marquis ornament.jpg)
 Thanks for uploading Image:Marquis ornament.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).

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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. —Angr 15:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Krwblogogold.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Krwblogogold.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Manitoba Highway 20.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Manitoba Highway 20.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:US 16A.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:US 16A.png, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the 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.  T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 08:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:1979 Grand Marquis coupe.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1979 Grand Marquis coupe.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Manitoba Highway 10.png
Thank you for uploading Image:Manitoba Highway 10.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:01, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Manitoba Highway 12.png
Thank you for uploading Image:Manitoba Highway 12.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:06, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Manitoba Highway 18.png
Thank you for uploading Image:Manitoba Highway 18.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:08, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Manitoba Highway 30.png
Thank you for uploading Image:Manitoba Highway 30.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:11, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Manitoba Highway 31.png
Thank you for uploading Image:Manitoba Highway 31.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Manitoba Highway 34.png
Thank you for uploading Image:Manitoba Highway 34.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Manitoba Highway 5.png
Thank you for uploading Image:Manitoba Highway 5.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:16, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Manitoba Highway 5A.png
Thank you for uploading Image:Manitoba Highway 5A.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Manitoba Highway 89.png
Thank you for uploading Image:Manitoba Highway 89.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:21, 8 March 2008 (UTC)