User talk:Toomanyairmiles

File permission problem with File:SHINEmk.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:SHINEmk.jpg I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 18:01, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Make Justice Work


A tag has been placed on Make Justice Work, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Zad68 (talk) 01:33, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at Make Justice Work
Welcome to Wikipedia, thank you for taking the time to create a page here. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you created yourself. Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the deletion tag you removed from Make Justice Work. Please do not continue to remove the deletion tag, instead, if you disagree with the deletion, you can follow these steps: Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do. For further help about the deletion, you could contact the user who first placed the tag or a highly active user who is willing to help with deletion. This message was left by a bot, so please do not contact the bot about the deletion. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 01:39, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Go to the page by clicking this link. Once there, select the button that says [ Click here to contest this speedy deletion].
 * 2) This will take you to the talk page, where you can make your case by explaining why the page does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion.

Speedy deletion nomination of File:MJW-LOGO.png


A tag has been placed on File:MJW-LOGO.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:16, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:18, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Polly Toynbee. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Peter Tatchell, you may be blocked from editing. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 17:20, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Make Justice Work. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Zad68 (talk) 18:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Make Justice Work. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ''Embedded external links are NOT ALLOWED. Read WP:ELNO.'' Zad68 (talk) 18:07, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you remove the maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ''This is based upon your removal of maintenance templates with this edit without addressing the issues raised in the templates. '' ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Make Justice Work for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Make Justice Work is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Make Justice Work until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:31, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. ''Based upon your edit here. Please refer to WP:ELNO point #11. Thank you.'' ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:31, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 16
Hi. When you recently edited Make Justice Work, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Justice Secretary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:39, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

User:Toomanyairmiles/Make_Justice_Work
I've userfied this article to your userspace per the AFD.--v/r - TP 03:09, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MJW-LOGO.png
 Thanks for uploading File:MJW-LOGO.png. 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).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have questions, please post them here.
 * I will automatically remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please ask an admin to turn it off here.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 01:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Make Justice Work is back?
Hi, I see the article is back, but I do not see any difference in the sourcing as compared to earlier in the year, when it was decided there wasn't sufficient sourcing to pass Wikipedia notability requirements. Will you be adding multiple independent reliable secondary sources showing significant coverage to the article? Thanks... 14:20, 20 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, to be honest I don't think we had a very fair hearing the first time around. I added multiple highly reliable sources including the Wales probation service, financial times, guardian, and telegraph newspapers after the article was marked for userification, and I believe we met your requests but the article was userified anyway. More reports and citations will be added over the next few days but I do believe that if many of the other criminal justice organisations that do have uncited (see Howard League and Prison Reform Trust) wiki pages do deserve them then MJW is also notable enough as it operates in the same space and is having a detectable influence on current government policy.


 * OK, I have put a Notability tag on the article because an article that has undergone an AFD and the community consensus was to Userify should not be moved back to mainspace without significant changes to the sourcing. Go ahead and put the new sourcing in and if it's sufficient we can remove the Notability tag.  I understand you personally feel the article meets Wikipedia requirements but in fact the community decided otherwise.  Pointing to other articles, which may have their own problems, isn't really a strong argument, see WP:OCE.  Your best path here is to provide the sourcing required.  Thanks....   15:06, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Could you be clearer on what you're looking for, MJW has had national media coverage as linked to in the article - it is cited in 24 BBC News articles and a similar number in the Guardian and Telegraph. It was my understanding the content of the FT article was what you were looking for, in so far as that links MJW research directly to the thinking of the Justice secretary.
 * My point regarding the other organisations was not 'if they exist, then we should', it was that other criminal justice organisations have not had to cite any sources to demonstrate their notability yet MJW's entry has been repeatedly questioned despite a plethora of primary sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toomanyairmiles (talk • contribs)
 * Notability on Wikipedia requires significant coverage in multiple, independent reliable secondary sources. This standard applies to all articles.  If there are other articles that don't meet this standard, eventually they too will get challenged and either the sourcing will be found and added to to the articles, or the articles will be deleted.  I'm taking a quick look again at the sourcing in the article and I am still seeing the same problems that were raised at the AFD.  The sources either are not independent (things published by MJW or instigated by a MJW supporter in a parliamentary session are not independent), or the coverage is not significant (brief in-passing mention is not sufficient), or the sources aren't quite reliable (opinion blogs are weak).  Wikipedia is looking for something like:  several full-length articles providing in-depth coverage of the MJW organization, printed as regular news articles carried in quality papers (Guardian) or news sources (BBC).  Can you provide that?  If so then the issue is solved.    19:53, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. Guardian news piece solely concerned with MJW's work, this, from the BBC News, This from http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article3540178.ece, another in http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/270521/Community-service-more-effective-, another BBC piece covering http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11112204 and Civitas reports, and finally a piece from the economist with MJW as it's focus. Will this be enough?
 * I guess I'm having trouble communicating Wikipedia's requirements here, sorry if I am being unclear. Let's go through the sources one by one:
 * The Guardian piece only mentions MJW in passing, and does not describe the organization at all. It mentions a work product of the organization, the Community or Custody inquiry (CCI), but not the organization itself.
 * The BBC piece describes a little bit about the committee set up by MJW to produce the CCI, but really not anything about the MJW organization itself. It is also not a regular news piece but appears to be a news blog.  Better than a regular blog but not as good as as news article.
 * The Times article "Court punishments are not effective, say victims of crime" appears to describe only the CCI work product.
 * The Express article also only refers to the CCI work product of MJW but does not detail the organization.
 * The BBC article "Cutting short jail sentences 'will not reduce crime'" gives one half of one sentence to describing the MJW organization.
 * The Economist article describes the work product and not the MJW organization.
 * Is the trouble we're having here confusion about the scope of the article? The article is set up to be about the organization.  The sources you keep pulling are about the CCI work product.  There's probably a good case for an article about the CCI work product, but still not enough about the MJW organization itself.  Consider changing the scope of what you want to write about here from the MJW organization itself to the CCI work product.    03:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Make Justice Work


The article Make Justice Work has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Result of AFD was to userfy pending more GNG citations after letting it have some time. Those have not been added, yet the article has been moved back into mainspace.  It appears those additional citations have not materialized, and as such this fails WP:GNG.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Make Justice Work for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Make Justice Work is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Make Justice Work & until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Illia Connell (talk) 22:57, 20 December 2012 (UTC)