User talk:T-dot/Archive 6

Fair use rationale for Image:Z_psss_film_18.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Z_psss_film_18.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 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. Videmus Omnia Talk  03:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:MARKX_03.jpg
I have tagged Image:MARKX_03.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Videmus Omnia Talk  03:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:MARKX_15.jpg
I have tagged Image:MARKX_15.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Videmus Omnia Talk  03:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:MARKX_17.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:MARKX_17.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  03:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:MARKX_18.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:MARKX_18.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  03:09, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wkc_logo.gif
I have tagged Image:Wkc_logo.gif as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Videmus Omnia Talk  03:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Cigar_Dave_Show.jpg
I have tagged Image:Cigar_Dave_Show.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Videmus Omnia Talk  03:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Mazda_Kabura_2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mazda_Kabura_2.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  03:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Mazda_Kabura_3.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mazda_Kabura_3.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  03:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:CVU status
The Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to and/or  status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 16:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Harry Potter roll-call
Hi there. Your username is listed on the WikiProject Harry Potter participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. Your name has therefore been moved to a "potentially inactive" list. If you still consider yourself an active WikiProject Harry Potter editor, please move your name from the Potentially inactive list to the Active Contributors list. You may also wish to add  to your userpage, if you haven't done so already. Conversely, if you do not wish to be considered a member of the WikiProject, leave your name where it is and it will be moved to the Inactive Contributors section. If you wish to make a clean break with the Project you may move your name to the Known to have left section. Many thanks.

RfA
 PeaceNT would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact PeaceNT to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
 * I'm impatient, sort of. PeaceNT 11:51, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, all right ... I guess we'll see how it goes. Like a lamb being led to the slaughter, I shall go if I must.  I see there are not a lot of other candidates at present to be scrutinized, which means extra special attention will be lavished on those few who dare to step into the gauntlet trap.  *Sigh*.  But I guess it is about time for me to pick up a mop and broom and dustpan already and get to work.  Despite my humility, please again accept my thanks for your enduring kindness.  --T-dot ( Talk/ contribs'' ) 12:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * OK I filled out the questionaire form, but it didn't load onto the general WP:RfA page - is that something you would do manually? Or did I do it wrong...?  --T-dot ( Talk/ contribs'' ) 14:39, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Your RfA was added (manually, not automagically) to the the main RfA page. You did fine. Good luck. PeaceNT 16:04, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy. The first half-day is proving to be a bloodbath of brutality.  But the train is at full steam and I guess we'll have to just wait and see what the Bureaucrats think of it.  Whatever happens, I want you to know that your nomination of me was by far the finest I ever saw in any RfA, and I cannot thank you enough for it.  --T-dot ( Talk/ contribs'' ) 00:30, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I suggest you take back all the RPP stuff and never set foot near there. See my support (#12) - you'll pass easily if you do that :) Good luck anyway! G iggy\Talk 01:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I really would have no idea how to go about "taking back" honest replies to questions and concerns posted in an RfA, especially since the "voting" so to speak has already started based on those answers and comments. I think if I were to try to somehow "cover up" my blundered statement on the RfPP process, that this would garner even more Opposes; and some changes of Supports or Neutrals to Opposes for improperly modifying my statements.  It just seems improper to delete stuff after folks have already "voted" on it.  The only remedy I can think of is to try to explain and clarify the mistake, and hope those who Opposed based on a simple misstatement will come back, review the comments, and reconsider their Oppose; and perhaps change to a Support or Neutral.  --T-dot ( Talk/ contribs'' ) 15:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Ring of Fire has become my RfA theme:
 * I fell in to a burning RfA, It went down, down, down as Opposes went higher. And it burns, burns, burns; the RfA, My RfA...
 * ...begging the forgiveness of Johnny Cash and June Carter Cash. --T-dot ( Talk/ contribs ) 14:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey, I don't get why a few users seem to be so concerned about your RFPP statement, maybe they never edited Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows last month to understand the situation... *sigh* Your RfA doesn't seem to look good in percentage, just over 60%, but I think your arguments should clarify it all. We'll see. In any case, I'm really impressed by your tactful response to the oppose !votes. Have a nice weekend, PeaceNT 09:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA was unsuccessful
I have closed your RfA. I am afraid there was no consensus to promote you. Please address the concerns that were raised and feel free to reapply in the future. Good luck. --Deskana (apples) 12:08, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry to hear this, T-dot. I wish you better luck next time. You can always count on my support if you'd like to run again in the future. I have no doubt that you'll be an administrator someday. Take care, PeaceNT 14:05, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Good faith?
You never have to worry about me not assuming good faith from you, T. Your edits are solid, and you seem like a stand-up guy/gal/hermaphrodite. :) Sorry to hear about your RfA. Was it something you were really wanting? - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  18:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Note
It wasn't actually undeleted, its just that a redirect was just created there. – Basar (talk · contribs) 19:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:David Arnott.pdf
Just a quick look. WP:MFD may be the right place. @pple complain 07:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Harry Potter AfD, PRoD, etc
Hi there, and thanks for the clarification about the PRoD of Magical Beasts. I essentially removed it because I looked at the article and it didn't have a PRoD tag on the article. After checking that it hadn't been PRoDed and saved, I removed it. I understand your motivation in placing it there, however. You should probably check out WikiProject Harry Potter/Notability, where we're having a thorough rummage around in the broom cupboard and a complete reorganisation of HP articles. Magical beasts is actually earmarked as a merge target for half a dozen other articles, so it is likely to grow into a comprehensive topic.

With regards the AfD history, I agree to a certain extent. I had originally set up that page with tags so that older AfDs could be kept, just not displayed on the main page. At some point the process was changed to deleting old AfDs. I would prefer, however, that the mainpage not be cluttered with huge numbers of AfDs, even in a scroll box. Instead, perhaps we should have another page which lists older AfDs - if someone needs to find an old one, they can have a rummage around in there. Happy-melon 16:03, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD Word choice
Hi there. Just a quick note: please don't use the word vanity in AfDs, regardless of how much the subject deserves it. It can be inflammatory, and there are usually other words that work just as well. See WP:AFD. (Or at the risk of using a argument ad jimboneum, see | here). Best, --B figura (talk) 18:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * (reply) Woops - me too - and I'll adjust my words accordingly. I have also used rv vanity rather frequently in reverting date and year article edits in cases where some kid posts his girlfriend's birthdate or something for kicks and jollies. Another "banned" word in Wikipedia, along with crufty and fancruft? This is the sort of thing that apparently sank my RfA. *sigh*. --T-dot ( Talk/contribs ) 18:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Bleh. That's a shame. Based on the Jimbo memo, it would seem that it shouldn't hugely matter for cases of blatant vandalism to established articles. Still, there's always the next RfA :-). Cheers, --B figura (talk) 18:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Jan Roskam
Hey T-dot, hope you're enjoying your wikibreak. I just wanted to let you know I finished my work on the article Jan Roskam and moved it to the mainspace. I'd appreciate any input you have. Stardust8212 03:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar The Good Counter-Vandal One


You use barnstars a lot, so this could be some eye-candy for you. You are one of the first 15 people to receive this barnstar you can give to counter-vandals, or just people who don't like vandalism. Have a fun day! 1 20:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Cateogry got deleted
I created the category, but apparently such cats are no longer recognised, so it got removed. If redlinks are still present, then I'll have to go over and delete them all.  Serendi pod ous  22:04, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Help requested
Hi there, if I may ask you a favor, could you give me some help with copyediting Reese Witherspoon? The page is currently at FAC; I've done some work myself but it has been suggested that the article needs a fresh approach from an uninvolved copyeditor. Would it be possible that you take a look at the page when you have some time? Thank you. PeaceNT (talk) 09:16, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll give it a shot.  The article seems very long (60k), with some subsections like "Commercial and critical success" just going on and on and on, to the extent that one needs a reading break.  I wonder if adding some sub-sub-sections might help break it up a little, perhaps milestone or period based?  Copyediting the current text is particularly challenging - it is often difficult to find the base text for all the detailed ref links (can't see the forest for all the trees!).  Anyway I'll try to wade my way through it and fix any rough patches I might find.  --T-dot ( Talk/ contribs ) 16:32, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! That was wonderful work of copyediting. It did make article look much better (not "harmed the GA / FAC efforts" and all that stuff... you always seem to fear the worst, don't you? Gloomy thoughts and all) A little too pessimistic for such an excellent writer you are. It is fortunate that I got your help, I like the "post-T-dot" version. Whatever the result of that ongoing FAC, I really appreciate your spending time taking care of the article. Noticed you left some comments on the talk page too, I'll get to answer them shortly. Best wishes, PeaceNT (talk) 16:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)