User talk:Theophilus75/archive01

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Katr67 22:10, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Sources for articles
Sorry, I should have made myself clearer. Also OWW is useful as a source, I don't consider it useful for establishing notability. It stands to reason they will try and have as many biographies (although some fall well short of what a reasonable person would call a biography - example) as possible, so simply having an OWW profile page shouldn't really be seen as an indicator of notability. Also if you look here you'll see that for current independent wrestlers it absolutely isn't an indicator of notability, as they can pay to get a profile page and send in the information themselves thus making it potentially unreliable as well. I'm well aware that Shag Thomas will probably be a tricky one to establish notability for, so I'm no plans to attempt to delete the article at any point. What you also need to remember is that as a tag is on the article, it appears in a category listing all the articles needing sources for a particular month. Editors do work from those categories to improve sourcing, so it's actually beneficial for articles to be tagged, especially ones that may require searching newspaper archives etc. One Night In Hackney 303 10:57, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Brady Boone/Dean Peters
I think just one article might be best! You'll need to put the information from the other article into the one that's currently undergoing AfD, I can't do it due to the GFDL, but as you made the edits in question you're free to copy and paste them to a different article. Thanks. One Night In Hackney 303 11:04, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

How about merging the other way around? Have Brady Boone direct to his real name of Dean Peters? I for one prefer having biographies under the real person's name if we can. Govvy 13:18, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * If it survives AfD, sort it out then. Right now the best way to make that happen would be to put the information into the article that's facing deletion. One Night In Hackney 303 14:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * And when you've done that, redirect Brady Boone to Dean Peters. I would normally do it myself, but I don't know if you've finished with the article. Thanks. One Night In Hackney 303 23:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Two Peer Review Requests Completed
Hi there, you requested two articles to be peer reviewed on the professional wrestling assessment page. Both article suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

Pacific Northwest Wrestling


 * The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.[?]
 * Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.[?]
 * See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.[?]
 * There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
 * Per Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called  ==The Biography== , it should be changed to  ==Biography== .[?]
 * Per Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading  ==Magellan's journey== , use  ==Journey== .[?]
 * Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

NWA Pacific Northwest Tag Team Championship


 * Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.[?]
 * There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
 * Per Wikipedia:Context and Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.[?]
 * This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.[?]
 * Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Neldav 17:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello and WP:OR stuff
Hey, did you snag that flag thing from me? Thanks for passing on the word about not just copying it wholesale. :) I mentioned that because I used to have a heading that said "I dig flags", which someone copied. I found that a little creepy for some reason... Anyway, I see you're interested in adding the evaluation stuff to our WikiProject template, for which I say "Bravo!" I really have no interest in that sort of thing, so I'm glad someone else does. You may have seen the discussion about implementing a ratings system on the WP:OR talk page? Anyway, there was a bit of interest in starting one, so if you take the lead on that, I'm sure others will follow. If it gets set up, I'll be sure to use it! Welcome to the project! Hey, do you actually belong to the project yet? Don't be afraaaaaid... Katr67 18:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I replied on my talk page and I'm putting a note on the WP:OR talk page about your ranking efforts. Katr67 19:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

NWA Championship Wrestling from Virginia
Just wanted to thank you for your support of the articles. I'm not sure why they have been singled out for deletion amongst all the NWA articles on Wikipedia. JeffCapo 23:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

It's under deletion review. I've quoted sources, but doubt it will do any good. JeffCapo 15:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Article was deleted, No "Admins" could give me a clear answer on what is considered a RS for Pro Wrestling.  JeffCapo 18:52, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * They can't give you one because it seems to change depending who is chiming in on a discussion. - Theophilus75 02:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Then how can they delete the article if no one can give me a straight answer? Kinda makes Wikipedia a bit contradictary, does it not?  JeffCapo 18:55, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wwelogo.jpg
Hello Theophilus75, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Wwelogo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Theophilus75. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 08:05, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Pardon me
But I am in no way against wrestling articles. I posted a response to your statement at Articles for deletion/Lloyd Youngblood. --Whstchy 21:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It's alright, happens to everyone. --Whstchy 23:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Notability of C.W. Bergstrom
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on C.W. Bergstrom, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because C.W. Bergstrom seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it 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 assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting C.W. Bergstrom, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate C.W. Bergstrom itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 01:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Bryan Adams (wrestler)
Thanks for the note and for not getting upset, the sources are still mostly primary sources, such as WWE.com. Also, IMDb,com is not a reliable source as their articles are written by volunteers (if you have time see here, here, and here). You can list it at WP:GA/R or you can just re-list it at WP:GAC and I'll step aside and someone else can review it. There is still the same number of articles in line, so you won't lose your place. Cheers. Quadzilla99 21:04, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * WWE.com is not an independent source as they treat the events from an in-universe perspective and they're the promoters of the event. It's not a scholarly independent source. It's like citing a company's website to write about them, ideally if you were writing about a company for example should cite independent publications like The New York Times or scholarly books on the event. Using them sparingly to descibe what happened is fine, but there should be more independent analysis. As another example if you were writing about a person you wouldn't use their autobiography except sparingly, to quote them or their views, because you would essentially be telling the story in their own words. If wrestling were real a lot of this would be different and you could use the company's website (like you can for the NBA or the NFL to describe events) but you should be saying: "they fought due to a contract x signed which stated..." basically you should be describing why things happened using more behind the scenes information. For instance, instead of saying "x punched y because y punched x's girlfriend." You should say, "McMahon felt x had the charisma to be a champion and so he scripted in scenarios which portrayed him as the hero, while y, who McMahon felt was only suited to be a villain due to his lack of charisma, was scripted to be x's foil and often did things such as punch women, steal, and lie. Y often complained to McMahon about the limitations he imposed on his character. Y felt he could be a charismatic champion, and ten minutes before his bout with x, y nearly refused to go on stage because he was scripted to lose." I'm not saying the whole article should be like this but it should contain more sources that explain why things happened. Unfortunately, these do not exist except is some rare cases. I looked over a couple of wrestling articles today and Montreal screwjob is a decent example, it's not great but a lot of it is written ina correct perspective. Quadzilla99 22:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If you disagree with it put it up for review or just re-list it. Thanks. Quadzilla99 23:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Basically, the entire article presents his fictional career as a wrestler as a biography, (see WP:WAF). There's no information about his early life, personal life, contracts, motivations behind why he did anything, girlfriends, wives (is he married?), education, where he lived. Basically he was born, he started wrestling, then he stopped wrestling. You're presenting the fictional life of a wrestler as a biography, and the wrestling career is written almost entirely largely from an in-universe perspective and your sources are deficient. Quadzilla99 23:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm putting it on GA review now, address your concerns there. Thanks. Quadzilla99 00:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

List reply
Thanks for the info. I am very happy that it is an A article, I was just using it as an example to say that List assessments are, by necessity, quite different from assessments of articles. --Sprkee 19:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Brian Adams (wrestler)
That's no problem. Drop a line on my talk page when you're ready for me to do an informal review. I would like to say, however, that using a wrestling article to get an idea of what it takes to bring an article to GA quality is a massive task. It is very difficult to achieve that. So difficult, in fact, that (as far as I know) none have been promoted under the current criteria. Because of the confidentiality clauses in the contracts of wrestlers coupled with the strict copyrights of matches (which typically prevent reproduction of any kind in video, audio, or print), it's practically impossible to gather the appropriate third-party sources. I hope you are able to achieve this, and I will certainly help you get there, as best as I can. Good luck, but if it doesn't happen, don't let that deter you from trying to bring other articles up to standards. And also know, if it doesn't attain GA, that doesn't mean it's not still a good article. Regards, Lara Love  T / C  05:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The GA/R discussion seems to have become idle. My recommendation is that it be renominated at WP:GAC. The changes since the fail are significant, therefore I believe there is practically no chance that the decision will be overturned at this point. However, I believe the article stands a good chance of passing another nomination. Let me know if renomination is a good recommendation in your opinion. If so, I'll archive the current GA/R discussion. Lara Love  T / C  04:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
Actually, it was Aboutmovies who gave you the award so thank him...but I agree, it was well-deserved! Thanks! --Sprkee 15:42, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
No problem, keep up the good work. Now if we can only figure out what to do with lists. Aboutmovies 21:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Brian Adams' post-wrestling career
I found a bit of information, but nothing major. According to http://www.411mania.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Number=203420, he was scheduled to debut November 16, 2002 in Las Vegas (seconded by Randy Savage). I can't find the original article, but this is from a copy on a message board. It talks a bit about his training, so it's decent. According to http://www.lvboxing.com/archives/november.htm, however, "Kronik" (as he was apparently billing himself) injured his arm while training for the match.

I also just found an article at http://www.wrestlingobserver.com/wo/news/headlines/default.asp?aID=8586 that gives some good information about Adams, including his work as a bodyguard for Randy Savage's rap concerts.

And at http://newpathproductions.com/board/viewforum.php?f=14, there's a forum in which people apparently used to write in questions for Brian Adams and Bryan Clark.

I'm pretty new to Wikipedia, so I'm not sure how much of this helps, but I thought I'd let you know what I could find. GaryColemanFan 16:49, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Adamsboxingpromo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Adamsboxingpromo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 05:43, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Re World Heavyweight Championship
See Triple H is listed as the first champion. There is no question that the WHC is related to the WCW and NWA titles before it. That has already been established. However, it doesn't share their title history.-- bullet proof  3:16 03:30, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Before you misinterpret things any further let me just make this clear, lineage and title history, are two very different things. Lineage is ancestry, confirming that the title is the successor to both the WCW and NWA championships. Title history specifically refers to the champions who have held the title (not belt). Because the WHC's title history and the WCW WHC's title history is clearly not the same, the World Heavyweight Championship is a new belt created from the legacy of the previous two titles. This has already been made clear in the article.-- bullet proof  3:16 03:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Lineage? Yes. Title History? In this case, No. That's what stated not only in the article but also on WWE.com.--  bullet proof  3:16 04:07, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The link from "the championship does not inherit the title history of the two belts" takes you to the WHC's history page which shows that it doesn't inherit the title history of the two titles. The link from "However, it has been made clear that it is the successor to both titles" takes you to the WCW WHC's history page which reads at the top "The World Heavyweight Championship that has recently been carried by such greats as Batista, Chris Benoit and Triple H got its start in WWE back in 2002. But its prestigious lineage can actually be traced back all the way to George Hackenschmidt and 1904. For years, it was known as the NWA Championship; then when WCW pulled out of the NWA in the early 1990s, Ric Flair was recognized as the first-ever WCW Champion. Since that time, top names such as Hulk Hogan, Ron Simmons and Bret Hart carried the championship prior to WCW's demise." which also shows that the WHC is a new title and that the title is related to the WCW/NWA titles which confirms succession. However I will tweak the article to make the lineage thing clearer. -- bullet proof  3:16 04:21, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll fix it then.-- bullet proof  3:16 04:27, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Correction made -- bullet proof  3:16 04:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It's no problem really. -- bullet proof  3:16 04:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

PCW
WP:TFD. Probably best to wait until the relevant articles have been deleted, that way it's obvious they need to be deleted to every editor, not just the ones that recognise a spam campaign from an indy promotion. One Night In Hackney 303  04:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

WWE Vengeance
(This is in response to your wrestling project talk page post). Well, to say this nicely: a few editors refuse to be open to change. They want the so called "policies" of the wrestling project to remain the same. These same editors moniter and control the articles as they see fit. Articles should be for everyone to edit, not just them. In my opinion, these certain editors at times think they own the articles, which is just wrong. But anyway.. when things are offically announced: they should be listed. All titles on the line has been clearly announced (and they know this), but refuse to listen to reason. If you want to discuss more (as I toned this down, because I didn't want to get blocked), email me (my email option is on for Wikipedia). RobJ1981 04:51, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the PCW prods
They were all removed, the main article has been removed three times and so I have listed it for AfD, and it might be worth keeping an eye on this. I have asked Fozzie to block the user to give us time to collect all the article together and to stop further articles being created, he may not be able to block him so we still may need to list every other article he has created in one mass AfD. Darrenhusted 01:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I have removed all the PRODs that were either re-instated by me or you are replaced them with a mass AfD then tacked them to the main AfD. I have also TfD two of the templates, I'll add re-directs to the AfD. Darrenhusted 11:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

So long as there are a few sets of eyes on the various pages then it should be a straightforward process. Darrenhusted 15:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Template:PCW Titles
I have removed the prod tag from Template:PCW Titles, which you proposed for deletion, because the page you proposed for deletion was not an article, user page, or user talk page. If you still think the page should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to it, as proposed deletion is only for articles, user pages, and user talk pages. Instead, consider using WP:TFD for this page. In some cases, a speedy deletion criterion may apply. Thanks! Od Mishehu 07:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

PCW Capital Punishment
I have removed the prod tag from PCW Capital Punishment, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-proded, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Articles for deletion. Thanks! Od Mishehu 07:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

WWF Light Heavyweight Championship
The key word being WAS. Every reign with that title prior to Taka Michinoku's first win is no longer recognized by World Wrestling Entertainment. The promotion which owns a championship has ultimate control over that championship and it's lineage. Antonio Inoki defeated Bob Backlund for the WWF Championship in a match in 1979, but he isn't recognized by the WWE as a former champion. This is the same situation. Without the recognition of the promotion that ultimately owns the title, there is no reign. I could purchase a replica title belt from WWE.com for 250 bucks, but that doesn't mean I'm going to be recognized as a former champion.Odin&#39;s Beard 23:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * No, I'm afraid a consensus wasn't reached on this situation. We were both discussing our sides of the argument, but no vote had ever taken place deciding the issue. I posted the last comment regarding our discussion and nothing more was said about it.Odin&#39;s Beard 23:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

It's never been about erasing history. It's about contradiction in the articles. I've been contributing to articles for about two years or so and I've seen other editors involved in similar debates concerning championship history, even when I first discovered Wikipedia. In all of these debates, by the time it was all said and  done, it was decided that ultimate control of a wrestling championship lies with the promotion or governing body that owns it. A good example of a similar debate involved Ted DiBiase and his "reign" with the WWF Championship. Even though the incident involving Andre the Giant "selling" the title to him was all part of a storyline to set up vacating the championship for WrestleMania IV, there were editors that felt he should be considered a former champion due to the fact that he did carry the title for about a week and during a house show was called a WWF Champion. It was decided that if the WWE's official stance was that he isn't a former champion, then he shouldn't be referred to as a former champion. Another similar thing has revolved around the the debate over how many world titles Ric Flair has won as a singles wrestler. The WWE considers him a 16 time world champion, though that isn't the official tally. Officially, he has 10 NWA, 8 WCW, and 2 WWF title reigns. Some feel he should have 22 reigns counting the two times he won the WCW International World Heavyweight Championship. The WWE doesn't recognize those reigns. It doesn't make any sense to me why, but that's not the issue. I fail to see how a wrestling promotion doesn't have complete control over their property, namely one of their championships. I don't see how the WWE has control over their other championships and not this one.Odin&#39;s Beard 14:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

No original research
You can add your pointy footnotes as much as you want, I'm not getting involved in an edit war. That won't stop anything being removed, so I suggest you actually source the article properly. One Night In Hackney 303  21:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I refer you to the policy linked above, kindly stop trolling my talk page. One Night In Hackney  303  21:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Shag Thomas
I got no problems with the prod being delete, it was partly to see if there was even anyone paying attention to some of these articles. I agree pre "Internet age" articles have a hard time getting sourced, I got no problems with the prod being removed at all. If you know anything about Shag Thomas maybe you could contribute to expanding the article a little? I'm not a deletionist who just wants to get rid of as much stuff as possible, I want the articles to be as good as possible (look at my user page to see how many articles I've added or improved). Feel free to de-prod Shag Thomas, I won't AFD it. MPJ-DK 13:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

John Cena GA Review
Thanks for actually taking the time. I've never been involved with the Good Article process, but I replied to some of your issues on the Cena talk page. I'll do some actual work on the Cena page (the Champion of Champion paragraph bugs me too) in the coming days.«»bd(talk stalk) 23:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Images
Basically, each image used in an article has to have a statement on the image's page (not on the image itself) stating the license it's used under. Don't have a lot of time to explain right now (work sucks), but sounds like someone uploaded images, forgot to tag them properly, and just threw it in the article. When/if I have time, I might put something up on WP:PW as a reminder. (you may want to ask there, too, just so the group is aware.) SirFozzie 17:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Adamsboxingpromo.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Adamsboxingpromo.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. MER-C 05:15, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Dave Bautista
Thanks for addressing your concerns with me on the article. I have removed the trivia section, and have put the points into the necessary places within the article. I have also extended the lead, but haven't been able to do your second point, however, I there are references on the article from other places than OWW or WWE.com, I think. Thanks for quick reviewing it anyway. I'll leave it as a GA-nominee, and hopefully I'll get a constructive response!Davnel03 16:25, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

John Cena GA review on hold
I was just reminding you that the week is up on the John Cena GA review hold that you put on it, and I'm pretty sure everyone is done fixing it up. Nikki311 20:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Image in Brian Adams article
Hi Theophilus - as part of the reason the GA for Brian Adams (wrestler) failed was because the image and  do not have a fair use rationale, since you uploaded them both you're really the only one that can fill it out. Could you please add the following section to the image pages in the appropriate place with the appropriate information filled in??

Fair use for Brian Adams (wrestler)
If you're in doubt about using the tag please refer to Image description page for more information. Without this information the Brian Adams article will never reach "GA" Status - thank you in advance. MPJ-DK 10:22, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

WPOR Collaboration of the Week
Greetings WPOR member, we are starting a weekly collaboration project where we will announce two articles that are currently stubs that we hope to work together to improve. No pressure to help, but if you would like to, just stop by one of the articles and see if you can find information to expand the article with, copy edit what is there, help with formatting, or add some images. This week’s articles are: Alis volat propriis and Fusitriton oregonensis. Aboutmovies 22:35, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

WPOR Collaboration of the Week
Greetings WikiProject Oregon employees. Well a big thanks to all those who helped improve Alis volat propriis and Fusitriton oregonensis last week. This week’s Stub improvement are: Government of Oregon which should be easy, and Miss Oregon. Again, no pressure to help with the collaboration, choose one, both, or neither. Also, feel free to opt out of the notifications at the new page dedicated to collaborative efforts at WPOR (newsletter is in R&D). Aboutmovies 18:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

WPOR Collaboration of the Week #3
Hello again WikiProject Oregon team members, its time for the next Collaboration of the Week. First a shout out to Sprkee for putting together some templates for this project. Now, in honor of Labor Day weekend and the outdoor nature of the activities that often accompany the three-day weekend, this week’s item is to de-redlink as many parks from the List of Oregon State Parks. Some may even by going to one of these places, a great opportunity to take a picture or two for an article. As always, participation is not required, though it is appreciated. And if you are caught, we will disavow any knowledge of your existence. Since we don’t want to waste any effort through duplication, please make a note on the talk page of which park article you are going to start. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Good day! Aboutmovies 19:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Law Enforcement Explorer Userbox
We have an image problem with the Explorer userbox. You cannot use a non-free image in the box. See Non-free content criteria. This use violates non-free content policy 9: "Non-free content is used only in the article namespace". Also see Userboxes. We have to come up with a free image for this. See the Eagle Scout box for an example. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:56, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

September WPOR Collaboration of the Week
First off, great job to all WikiProject Oregon folks for last week’s List of Oregon State Parks work. We pounded out six new state park articles: Sarah Helmick, Bald Peak, Bob Straub, Sumpter Valley Gold Dredge, Tumalo, and Peter Skene Ogden. Plus numerous other edits to improve the existing articles. As a reward, we are introducing the COTW award WPOR COTW award, and this time it goes to User:Woodstein52 for starting three of the articles.

On to this week. We are back to the usual two Top importance Stubs: Sunstone and Oregon, My Oregon. Both are stub pluses, so it shouldn’t take much to upgrade them both. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Good day! Aboutmovies 22:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use disputed for Image:Donowen.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Donowen.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 18:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

WPOR Collaboration: 09172007
All righty WPOR ladies and gentleman, great job last week with our state song and gemstone. I have bumped them up to Start class. I haven’t looked at the contributions, so the COTW award will be later. This week’s articles are Darlene Hooley, by special request, and another Top stub, our very own state rock, the Thunderegg. Yes, apparently we have a state rock and state gemstone. No word on whether there is a state stone too. Hooley basically needs some sources to make it to the next level. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. In the words of Beaver Joe, whoop! Aboutmovies 18:12, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Fall WPOR COTW
Welcome to autmun and the weekly COTW news. Great job to those who helped out with last week’s articles: Darlene Hooley & Thunderegg. Both made great improvements. This week, something a little different. With fall upon us, the photo ops are going to be harder to get, so we have a photo request fulfillment drive. Take a look at the requested pictures for  Oregon category or the graphics subproject for what’s needed. Then go take a picture, or search online for a free picture to upload (US gov sites are great and there are links available from the above links). If you fill a request, be sure to remove the request template from the article’s talk page. Our other item is another red link removal drive, this time on the flagship Oregon article. Like the state parks red link drive, try to coordinate on the talk page. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Aboutmovies 01:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Week 1 October WP:ORE COTW
I know everyone has been waiting anxiously for this week’s COTW, so here they are: Barlow Road and Columbia River Plateau. Both are almost Start class, just some formatting and referencing, plus a little expansion and they will be there!

As to last week, it is difficult to track the items we were working on, but I know some pictures were added and at least three red links were removed from Oregon, so thank you to all those who participated. The award winner will be GoodDamon for their creation of the Oregon Forest Resources Institute article. We have now worked through all the Top class stubs and are into the High class stubs. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Happy editing, and remember if you see a downed power line, don’t pick it up. Aboutmovies 20:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

WPOR CoTW: Don Schollander & Conde McCullough
Greetings WPOR world. Last week was great with the Barlow Road seeing lots of improvement, maybe even B class. Columbia River Plateau also saw some improvement, maybe enough to bump it to Start. On with the countdown, another two Stubs in the High category, both happen to be people: Don Schollander a multi-gold medalist; and then world-renowned bridge architect and all-around swell guy Conde McCullough. Schollander needs sources more than anything, and McCullough needs more of a bio, plus maybe a nice chart for the bridges with type/year/location/length. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. This week’s safety tip, stranger=danger. Aboutmovies 18:11, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiOregon COTW
Greetings once again WikiProject Oregon members. Thank you to those who help out with improving Conde McCullough and Don Schollander last week. This week is a Stub break, with a Ref improvement drive for Oregon and a request for work on Portland Police Bureau. For the ref improvement, this means sourcing tagged statements and standardizing all existing citations, both of which are needed for GA and FA status. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Aboutmovies 18:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Week
Howdy doody ya’ll WPOR poke, time for more COTW. Thanks for the work on Portland Police Bureau and improving the references at Oregon. This week we are back to Stubs with Eastern Oregon and Fort Vancouver National Historic Site. Both need just a little TLC to make it to Start. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Aboutmovies 01:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bruisebrothers.jpeg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bruisebrothers.jpeg. 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 15:38, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bonnema-mayne.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Bonnema-mayne.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 05:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

SPAM ala COTW
Ladies and Gentlemen its time for another episode of Collaboration of the Week. Last week’s show starring Fort Vancouver National Historic Site & Eastern Oregon received high ratings. This week’s show star two more stubs, Johnny Kitzmiller & John Wesley Davis. As always, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Don’t delay, act today! Aboutmovies 18:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

New COTW
Hello again from WikiProject Oregon. A round of applause for the project in October when we added three GAs, one FA, plus 10 DYKs! Next, thanks to all those who participated in last week’s Collaboration of the Week, John Wesley Davis & Johnny Kitzmiller. This week we have the Cayuse War, and in honor of the home opener, the Portland Trail Blazers. Once again, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Aboutmovies 18:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Newpwlogo.jpeg
Thanks for uploading Image:Newpwlogo.jpeg. 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 10:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

WPOR's newest COTW
Thank you to all those editors who helped improve Cayuse War and Portland Trail Blazers last week as part of the Collaboration of the Week. They are looking much better. This week, with the election season over, we’ll tackle a request for Oregon Ballot Measure 37 (2004), which should have plenty of WP:RS available to work with on improvement. Our other article is another Stub in the High category, our only Miss America, Katie Harman. Once again, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Legal disclaimer: WikiProject Oregon and its affiliates are not liable for any personal injuries acquired while editing on the COTW including but not limited to carpel tunnel syndrome, Wikistress, alcoholism, anxiety attacks, or extreme emotional distress. Aboutmovies 20:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Oregon COTW version 11.20
Welcome to the jungle folks. Thanks to those who helped out with Katie Harman and Oregon Ballot Measure 37 (2004) last week. This week, we have two high priority stubs, one of the two major hospitals in Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center, and Oregon Department of Education. Enjoy your turkeys, or for some enjoy your tofurkeys. As always, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Aboutmovies (talk) 09:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

WPORE Civil War COTW
Hello again to WikiProject Oregon members, time for this week’s Collaboration of the Week. Thank you to those who helped out improving Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center and Oregon Department of Education last week. This week, in honor of the annual Civil War, we have the University of Oregon Ducks and the Oregon State University Beavers. Or if you attended some other school, feel free to improve your alma mater’s article. Once again, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Aboutmovies (talk) 07:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

FA for WPORE COTW
Greetings boys and girls from the fine folks at The Wettest Place on Earth! A thank you to those who helped last week make some good improvements on the U of O and OSU OS articles. For this week, the next stub on the list is Fortune 1000 company Lithia Motors, Inc. way down south in Dixie, which only needs a little added to make it to Start. The other is a bit more of a challenge, but Linus Pauling I believe is our only Nobel Prize winning Oregonian, and a former FA. So hopefully we can get it back to FA, check the talk page’s article history template for comments. Once again, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Aboutmovies 20:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Newpwlogo.jpeg
Thanks for uploading Image:Newpwlogo.jpeg. 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) 19:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Oregon COTW #25 (or so)
Hello again from the COTW of WikiProject Oregon. We thank ye who went forth through the rain and mud and helped out with last week’s articles Lithia Motors and Linus Pauling. Hopefully Linus can return to FA status early next year. This week we have the request of Oregon Ballot Measure 5 (1990) and High importance article Portland Rose Festival. Whatever work you can contribute would be greatly appreciated by our master. Once again, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Aboutmovies (talk) 08:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy Holidays from WP:ORE
Hello again from the Collaboration of the Week for WikiProject Oregon. This week are two more stubs, the Oregon Garden and former Congressman Robert B. Duncan. Both are close to moving up to Start class, so only a little work is needed. Once again, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Aboutmovies (talk) 00:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Newpwlogo.jpeg
Thanks for uploading Image:Newpwlogo.jpeg. 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) 00:02, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Holiday COTW
Greetings to all the WikiProject Oregon crew. Happy holidays to those who celebrate holidays. Thanks to those who helped out with last week’s articles Oregon Garden and Robert B. Duncan. Due to the holidays and people likely to be spending less time on Wikipedia, the new Collaboration of the Week will run for two weeks (OK actually I’ll be out of the country, but same difference). The first item will be a general Reference Improvement Drive. So find an article, source an tagged sentence or bring all the citations up to WP:CITE standards. The other item is a Tagging Drive, looking for those random articles about Oregon that do not yet have a WikiProject Oregon tag on the talk page. In the past I’ve found the Category:People from Oregon and its sub cats fertile ground for the lost Oregon souls. Once again, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Aboutmovies (talk) 05:59, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

New Year COTW from WP:ORE
Happy New Year to all the Oregon WikiProject People. A big round of applause for everyone last year, we got a lot done. A thank you to everyone who helped with the last Collaboration of the Week, I saw a large number of articles in the unassessed section and our total number of articles is over 5000 (we were around 4000 in June when the assessment program finished the initial run) so I know at one person was busy tagging. This week we are back to a High importance Stub article the one and only max security prison, first prison, and only one with a death row in the state, the Oregon State Penitentiary. Then, by request we have one of the most prolific ballot measure sponsors in Mr. Bill Sizemore. Once again, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Aboutmovies (talk) 16:51, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Oregon GA COTW
Howdy to WikiProject Oregon members, time for another edition of the Collaboration of the Week. As you may have already noticed, our flagship article Oregon is up for the third time as we make a push to get WP:GA status before going for WP:FA. Since this will take some time to get where it needs to be, this will be the COTW for more than just a week. Also, so we hopefully don’t trip over ourselves, try to coordinate on the article’s talk page. Once again, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here.

On another note, just a general good job/pat on the back to the project for a great 2007, the first full year of the project. We had 83 DYKs about Oregon, improved one article to FA, and went from around 4 GAs to 17 GAs. Plus numerous new articles, improvements to existing, the introduction of the COTW, and the introduction of article assessment at the project. Again, great job and here’s to a new year. Aboutmovies (talk) 17:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Sbarr-doll.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Sbarr-doll.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Cheers, L  A  X  18:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Snowy COTW from WPOR
Hello again from WP:ORE. Please note the Collaboration of the Week is running two hours late, no morning kindergarten, and routers are on snow routes. Thank you to those who helped improve Oregon, we are inching towards GA quality. This week we have another High importance Stub in our official state insect (who knew?) with the Oregon Swallowtail, and then a new article I came across, Biglow Canyon Wind Farm. Help if you can get out of the snow. Once again, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Good day! Aboutmovies (talk) 16:08, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Tom Peterson says it time for Oregon COTW
Wake up! Wake up to a happy day! Says Tom Peterson. Greetings to the gang at WP:ORE, its time for another round of Collaboration of the Week. Last week was a very successful endeavor with great improvement to Oregon Swallowtail and Deuce Biglow Canyon Wind Farm. OK, so there’s no “e” but it makes me laugh. The Biglow production was so successful we got our first DYK out of it. So, let’s try for a second with the tallest building in the state, the Wells Fargo Center. Then by request we have the former governor (among other things) Neil Goldschmidt. Again, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, visit here. Aboutmovies (talk) 08:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Clown COTW
Greetings once again to members of the best encyclopedia online about Oregon (aka WP:ORE)! Last week we improved Neil Goldschmidt to close to GA level, and moved the Wells Fargo Center from Stub to Start for the Collaboration of the Week. This week we’re clowning around with some bozo from Oregon, Pinto Colvig, and then in an attempt to garner another DYK, the rather stubby Cooper Spur. As always, any contribution is appreciated, and to opt out of these messages visit here.

As we have quite a few new members over the last six months, I’ll make another pitch for our various subprojects. Listed here, you will find a variety of groups focused on specific areas of Oregon from transportation to culture. Not only can you sign up and coordinate work there, but each often has useful sources and templates related to that topic. No pressure, just an introduction to those new to the project. Adios. Aboutmovies (talk) 17:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Adamscrush.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Adamscrush.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. BJBot (talk) 18:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Adamscrush.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Adamscrush.JPG. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media 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 this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. βcommand 23:41, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:NWAPNWbelt.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:NWAPNWbelt.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Greetings from the EMS Taskforce

 * I have seen you have taken interest in EMS related articles and we currently will be doing a GA/article improvement on Emergency medical service it will be our first project as a task force and would love your input and editing, Cheers! Medicellis (talk) 01:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Portlandfireandrescuelogo.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Portlandfireandrescuelogo.gif. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)