User talk:U-Mos/Archives/2011/June

X Factor US
Okay I don't know what country you are from but it has been confirmed in Britain by SIMON COWELL, the creator of the show that Cheryl Cole has been axed from X Factor US, announced on BRITAIN'S GOT TALENT LIVE! On Monday Night, equally Louis Walsh a Judge on the UK version said today at the first Live Auditions in Birmingham that he has been texting Cheryl and she is fine about her axe. Thirdly do you really think Cheryl's management would let this rumor carry on if it wasn't true as it looks bad on her. Her management including Will.i.am have confirmed it saying she is moving on and would like to thank everyone for the support. Please do not leave me messages slamming my editing when actually I am making the site accurate by removing her name as she is no longer a judge. Why don't you get your facts right before you vandalize a page! Orace 45

RE Or Maybe you could tell me why your deleting a change that is correct and why you are trying to put her name on the article when she is not a judge thus putting false information on Wikipedia, explain please.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Oracle 45 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:FFLucidDreams.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:FFLucidDreams.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Judoon
Hi, could I ask why you made this revert? It seemed like a perfectly valid piece of information in the same vein as the Captain Avery one immediately before it? Best, ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  sundries  ─╢ 18:03, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Nope, seems fair actually :) ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  sundries  ─╢ 18:15, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2011
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on A Good Man Goes to War. Users are expected to collaborate with others and avoid editing disruptively. In particular, the three-revert rule states that: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:14, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
 * A proposal relating to this issue has been made at Wikipedia talk:Edit warring. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  You may go away now.  ─╢ 10:22, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Lucas/Walliams
Do you suppose it would be worthwhile if you were to start a discussion of the Lucas/Walliams "break-up" rumor on the Come Fly with Me discussion page and elaborate what's in your edit summary? You're a Brit, I believe, and can evaluate the quality of source material; I raised an eyebrow at the source, which looked like a tab, but couldn't be sure, so I just tidied the text and left judgment on reliability to those who know best. I can easily see this bit of news coming and going from the article endlessly until something definitive quashes it, particularly given the series begins on BBC America on Saturday evening. It strikes me as a good preemptive move. Drmargi (talk) 12:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Offwiththeirheads.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Offwiththeirheads.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will 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 turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:42, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Waterloo Road edits
Hi there. I would just like to inform you that your edits to the Waterloo Road articles regarding an eighth series have, at current, been reverted back to original form. It has not yet been 100% officially confirmed that the next set of 20 episodes, currently being filmed, are to compromise as an eighth series, despite the change in transmission duration, represented on the Radio Times website. The BBC microsite, Sky TV listings etc are still showing 30 as the episode count at current, and there have been many indications of the episodes forming as Series 7 Part 2, such as Naveed Chaoudry's agency site stating he "will join the regular cast of Waterloo Road Series 7 as new bad boy, Tariq following his filming with Silent Witness" http://www.paynemanagement.co.uk/.

Ulitmatley, it will be the decision of Shed Productions on how they want to advertise the episodes, be it as an extension of Series 7 or Series 8, but until it is known, the evidence currently suggests the first. ED drama (talk) 01:29, 30 June 2011 (UTC)


 * In response to the comment on my page (sorry, I must have wrote this as the same time so I did not see it) how a magazine etc refers to the series is not official, not matter how "reliable" they come across. For example, Whats On TV advertised Series 6 Spring Term as Series 7. Since the series have been split, many sites have often registered Autumn and Spring Terms as seperate series, which in a way is true, however when combined by seriel number, they are in fact one series, just split for broadcasting purposes. ED drama (talk) 01:36, 30 June 2011 (UTC)