User talk:ViperSnake151/archive4

Application Stores
The article after the revisions, had a "Apple-centric" tone and had deleted the mentioned lawsuit against Apple for copyright infringement. I felt like the article had been in a few ways vandalized. Possibly not by you, but by the banned user below. The article was supposed to be a broad look at application stores in general, not an ad for Apple and the edits made did not add value in a whole. That said, I understand your revert and I admit I think I messed up and I didn't mean to mark your edits as vandalism. Thank you again. hutchisojl {talk} 16:47, 22 February (PST)

Swine Flu Name
Thanks for giving me the Wiki rule, since I commented the name has begun to stick even more, though it grates a little to a medical scientist like me that it is such a poor and misleading description, lets hope they evolve it! --Hontogaichiban (talk) 22:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Tv-Links.
I have contacted them via email and confirmed that they are indeed the same TV-Links. Ive emailed them again asking about the results of the cases against them. Ill add all the info to the page soon. Just letting you know this so you don't delete it again. - Yamagushi

Sent the email to you for verification. - Yamagushi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yamagushi (talk • contribs) 19:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Your Changes on Gurgaon page
Gurgaon is a rapidly growing metropolitan and I personally feel that having a lot of images on the page in not bad. Actually it makes the page much more appealing. I do agree that the way the article has been written is below average and I would appreciate u making cahnges. One the Shooping Mall section u reverted everything to another page. i do think that the Shopping mall section to remain It is 1 of the only reason why Gurgaon is so famous across India. So I have reverted your image removing good faith edits. ThanksEnthusiast10 (talk) 20:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Your GOOD FAITH contribution to the Gurgaon article has been reverted please discuss changes on the Duisscusion page. Thank You Manaspunhani (talk) 09:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You considered the image to be deleted but it has been used by numerous articels and also used as a cover on Delti Times saturday magazine. Do u want me to upload it as a cover of a magzine I would do that.


 * Yes Enthusiast 10 and I bith upload images by flickr users to Wiki. I can send u the cover of a the DElhi Times saturday magazine that shows that image. Manaspunhani (talk) 09:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The photographer of the image, Gurinder Osan's picture are avilable on many sites on the web. Manaspunhani (talk) 09:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Changes to Image use policy
Just FYI— You were reverted over there on the basis that your edit changed the meaning without discussion. However, the text you removed was only recently introduced, itself entirely without discussion or evidence of support that I could find. On that basis I reverted the revert and noted my reason in the edit summary. Cheers. --Gmaxwell (talk) 21:39, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah I didn't see any support for that either. That recent undiscussed addition was draconian in any case:P. It almost seemed to me like it was suggesting that we photoshop legitimate images in order to remove any trademarks! If it isn't a free image, then you sure as heck shouldn't be messing with it. Someone owns that thing, and even if they are letting you use it, they're not going to want you changing it. Not only that, but it said "trademarks are copyrights", as if trademarks are a type of copyright. Uh.... no. Trademark, Copyright, and Patent are 3 totally different things, with different rules, different purposes, and different consequences for violation. I wish people wouldn't confuse them all the time.Gopher65 talk 02:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Canadian_bills2.jpg
I saw you put http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Canadian_bills2.jpg put for speedy deletion. I didn't see any obvious explanation anywhere of your reasons, nor did I see any obvious place to discuss an image deletion. Should this be on the talk page of one of the articles using that image?Gopher65 talk 02:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry
Ok I guess you are right. Sorry for the inconvenience caused.Manaspunhani (talk) 06:24, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Free Software Portal Logo.svg
Thanks for uploading Image:Free Software Portal Logo.svg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

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

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

bulldozer
We've been through this already, and I moved the article back to the *correct* title. Correct in the context of article titles is not factual correctness, but what the topic is most commonly referred to. In this case, it's without doubt Jerusalem bulldozer attack, and therefore that is the correct article title. Please don't revert again. "Jerusalem front-end loader attack" is wrong as the article title. Everyme (was Dorftrottel) (talk) 15:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep up the good work
trying to stop articles turn into glossy OR brochures. --Allemandtando (talk) 13:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Your talk on my page
I'm not 122.162.109.130 I've not logged in for the past month how can I even edit. Pl. talk to 122.162.109.130 for revirting you edits anyway somebody used huggle and made it okayManaspunhani (talk) 02:58, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Metacity edit
Hi,

The recent change you made to Metacity is incorrect, as confirmed by User:Marnanel, the project's maintainer. GTK+ isn't a language; please make sure to double-check technical content changes in the future. Thanks. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

InkBall
Hi, could you fix your AfD nomination for InkBall? There's no AfD tag on the article. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 14:05, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

You win
You win. I am leaving Wikipedia. I am not sure why you wanted me gone so badly, but you can be happy I am gone. -- TV -  VCR   watch  20:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of I Am Rich
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article I Am Rich, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.   Asenine   16:23, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Your PUIs
Could you explain your rationales to me? The 'no freedom of panorama in France' doesn't make sense to me.   Asenine   19:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I am well aware of the law. You should know however that the copyright for the main Louvre architecture ran out years ago.   Asenine   20:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

IfD
Hi, I noticed that you put up an image cause it had a malformed FUR. Next time, could you just take a few minutes more time and just fix it. WP:FURME can help. Thanks LegoKontribsTalkM 17:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

August 2008
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. WilliamH (talk) 13:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

There is a source for lemonparty411
"ViperSnake151 (Talk | contribs | block) m (8,155 bytes) (Reverted good faith edits by WhisperToMe; No source. w/TW) (rollback | undo)"

Vipersnake, I included a source; the URL itself. Now, because lemonparty is blocked as a spam site, I cannot include a clickable link; one has to manually copy and paste the URL into the address bar. BTW, I do not believe I need to have a source indicating notability of the particular picture; the website itself is notable, so anything on it may be described in the entry about the site. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:38, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

There are times when it is perfectly reasonable to only use first party content to source claims. As per WP:RS:
 * "Primary sources — writings on or about a topic by key figures of the topic — may be allowable, but should be restricted to purely descriptive explanations of the subject or its core concepts. They should not be used for interpretation or evaluation; use the interpretations and evaluations of reliable secondary sources for that purpose. Tertiary sources — compendiums, encyclopedias, textbooks, and other summarizing sources — may be used to give overviews or summaries, but should not be used in place of secondary sources for detailed discussion."

Now, the sentence about lemonparty411 is purely descriptive. There is no interpretation or evaluation of the image; the sentence merely says that the image exists on the website. The part of the lemonparty section which does require secondary sources is the part about the popularity; this is well-sourced, so the lemonparty section itself can stay. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:46, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Czeslawa-Kwoka.jpg
There is nothing illegal about the image. It is public domain, and even if it wasn't its use would be fair use. The reason it has thirty billion tags and a talk page longer than most articles is because NYScholar is obsessed with ridding Wikipedia of it and all similar images, see and. -Nard 19:06, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Czeslawa-Kwoka.jpg and Image:Czeslawa-Kwoka2.jpg
Inaccurate comments above: I have been struggling to try to get the image pages presented properly so that they can remain in the article on Kwoka without jeopardizing the article in the future, since it was the subject of a deletion request in the past [Please see the article talk page (top template re: that]. I am "not obsessed with ridding Wikipedia of" these images; I want them uploaded and presented properly.  See the image talk pages for more recent comments.  A newly-cropped version of the 1st image created by another user still apparently needs to be uploaded.  The image pages have both been revised by others to account for the problems and apparently the images no longer reside in Wikipedia Commons. The Wikipedia Commons seems to redirect to Wikipedia versions now.  Please double check.  Thanks.   --NYScholar (talk) 22:52, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, I see that there are still duplicate files in Wikipedia Commons accessible via link. A category indicating that needs to be entered in image page? --NYScholar (talk) 23:08, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Movieland tightening-up
Nice job on that. I had just gotten to the point of thinking about the best way to shorten the lead when I saw that you had already done it, and tightened up the rest of it as well. Deliberately or not, you seem to have corrected some problems noted at Good article reassessment/Movieland/1. Kudos for the image-copyright work especially, I have always dreaded that area.

I notice you recently edited Micro Bill Systems which of course has parallels to Movieland; I've just started working on a more balanced version in a sandbox. Interestingly, one of the references says there has been some cross-pollination between principals of the two companies. --CliffC (talk) 16:25, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Uploads
Thank you for your explanation. Leptictidium (mt) 22:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of MileyWorld
A tag has been placed on MileyWorld requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about 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 indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. MANdARAX •  XAЯAbИAM  00:13, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

2008 Summer Olympics Opening Ceremony start time
Hi. I noticed that you changed the article, noting that you'd found sources saying that the Beijing Opening Ceremony started at 8PM, rather than 8:08PM, but you didn't provide any of these sources in your edit. Could you please provide them now? Here are three of their official news releases pointing to a planned 8:08pm start time, so I guess I'd be looking for a report saying that instead of starting when it was planned to start, it actually started 8 minutes earlier than planned. - Mark 14:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hm, weird. I think the ticketing times can be largely ignored (they would have been printed well in advance of the ceremony and may take into account the drums and stuff as the build-up), but that news release of theirs says 8PM too. In the end, it's not really that important, and the only way to really know for sure would be to get a recorded copy of it with time codes. Too much effort :) - Mark 15:14, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, this makes quite a bit of sense: "After years of planning by officials and training by athletes, the ceremony began just before the scheduled start time of 8.08pm amid tight security." - from here -- so I guess they scheduled it for 8:08PM and actually started it at 8PM. - Mark 15:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Wbvc the cw.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Wbvc the cw.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) 05:31, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Image status


What part of the explanation given on the image is inadequate? I have copied the terms of the site from which the image was taken - these clearly state that it may be used since it is a primary work of the CISO and not a product of its vendors, etc, subject to copyright. What else should be provided? Perhaps you can point out to me how the use in WP is outside of the permissions stated or how that statement is defective as a representation of the terms stated on thewebsite. Thank you, Leonard G. (talk) 03:41, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * We do not have legitimate and explicit proof that California government works are in the public domain. It redirects to No license on Wikipedia, and directly to Copyvio on Commons. See Template talk:PD-CAGov. ViperSnake151 11:19, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * So what form and content of "legitimate and explicit proof" would satisfy you ("we")? Please be explicit and detailed in your answer and I will do my best to obtain it. (I have been around with this before on other California agency images and I expect that you will be going after those also, even though they have long been well addressed to other's satisfaction by the means addressed for the image in question.) - Leonard G. (talk) 16:40, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

TV Stations
Do I understand correctly that the OTRS ticket 2008091610055854 applies to *categories*? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 03:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I just posted this over at the AfD discussion, but aside from the leads for those articles, the data and the tables themselves are not covered by copyright in the United States. The very basic (and very public) data listed in those "affiliates of" articles is not novel; see sweat of the brow for the legalese.    user:j    (aka justen)   05:49, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Is there any particular reason you are taking it upon yourself to handle OTRS issues on-wiki, despite you not having OTRS access (and by extension, the ability to read the ticket you cited as a deletion reason)? If something needs to be done per OTRS, there are plenty of active en.wikipedia users with OTRS access capable of doing it. Mr.Z-man 06:44, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Edit summary
Hi ViperSnake151. Do you know how to make an edit summary? It would be helpful for comprehending for edits. Your edits in the three chemical templates do not seem to be an improvement to me, but you might have good reasons that you should have given briefly in the edit summary. --Leyo 18:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Pitbull with Lipstick
A tag has been placed on Pitbull with Lipstick, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 00:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Lotsa spaghetti
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 17:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of I hope she made lotsa spaghetti
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 17:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The WeatherStar 4000 Emulator Article
I understand it isn't mine, but I do use it and it hasn't even cost me a single penny. TWCFanChris (talk) 23:10, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

My revision of something you did around june
I know this is the most delayed response ever, but i rarely log onto my account [editing without logging in, which i know is kind of stupid but... well, i just do it] Regarding undoing your additions i can only honestly say, it really doesnt seem like something i would do, especially on a talk page. I really strongly suspect that i was either entirely in error, or the edit was performed on a computer i failed to log out on [a genuine possibility given the time of the edit] either way i apologise for the error on my part and the significant delay in addressing it. LordFenix (talk) 18:05, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ftnlogo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ftnlogo.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) 04:39, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Kfve.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Kfve.gif. 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) 05:14, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Newwdbd.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Newwdbd.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) 05:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Email
Hi Viper, could you please email me at dbwiki (at) gmail.com when you get the chance? I need to clarify something with you quickly. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 10:39, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of All toasters toast toast
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Uw-authorshipclaims
Template:Uw-authorshipclaims has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Anomie⚔ 12:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

List of television stations in North America by media market
Please don't add Nielsen information to the List of television stations in North America by media market page again. We are no longer allowed to use Nielsen information per an OTRS ticket. -  NeutralHomer •  Talk  • October 27, 2008 @ 23:41
 * Do take this up with WP:TVS first before editing, I am pretty sure they don't want any Nielsen linkage or Nielsen information. If there was a link there, it shouldn't have been. -  NeutralHomer  •  Talk  • October 28, 2008 @ 01:10

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

RickRolling Edit
Good catch on the "Origin" section! Edit Centric (talk) 21:06, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:New Year's on Television
Category:New Year's on Television, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 10:53, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

FYI
You nuked the page here. :) rootology ( C )( T ) 00:52, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

re: album covers on articles that are not about the album or its cover
Re: this edit of IWF block of Wikipedia. I for one don't care if the article is blocked, but I do care if Wikipedia or its editors get sued for WP:COPYVIO. The article is not about the album cover per se, although that would make an interesting article itself given its long history of controversy, nor is it an article about the album. See my comments at the bottom of the talk page. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  01:04, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

CSD for Image:Virgin Killer.jpg
Please note that this image has been kept at IfD many times. It satisfies fair use on the album page, so the image should not be deleted. Questioning its use in Internet Watch Foundation and Wikipedia should not be done this way, and anyway that page is at AfD currently. I suggest removing the CSD tag. Rambo's Revenge (talk)  13:20, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I have removed the SD template. The appropriate way to nominate this image for deletion is through a regular IFD. __meco (talk) 13:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Firefox
The theme overflows from the MacOS default, though, and is thus copyrighted by Apple. Either way, it is not required to show the browser. &mdash; neuro(talk) 12:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree. If, hypothetically, there was an image of the album artwork and the caption "The album sold well in stores" in an article related to the album, but notabout the album, one wouldn't expect it to require an image of the album in a store. &mdash; neuro(talk) 12:38, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * A notice - I am wondering whether part of your argument is based on the fact that mine may not be an actual screenshot of the message recieved (I noticed it is different to yours). I assure you, it is. My ISP is BT. &mdash; neuro(talk) 12:40, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Internet Watch Foundation and Wikipedia
I have nominated Internet Watch Foundation and Wikipedia, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Internet Watch Foundation and Wikipedia&. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Guy (Help!) 18:39, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Request For Rollback
Hiya, I've fulfilled your request. No problem at all. Pedro : Chat  15:30, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

re: uhh
Hi there,

I did protect the page, however the protection expired yesterday. Does the page need to be re-protected or have disputes been resolved?

The Helpful  One  13:06, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Indef protected, you can request unprotection on WP:RFPP or on my talk page when the RFC is complete. The  Helpful  One  14:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Comment

 * If it is published, its published. Its just not going to be mass-distributed. The work itself was "exhibited outside Wikipedia" as someone took a screenshot of it and put it online.

All copies of build 6596 are stolen, it was never distributed or intended to be distributed. Microsoft did exhibit it (i.e. show it off), so someone could have made a photo, but no one would have legitimately been about to make a screenshot. Dragons flight (talk) 10:55, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Detroit Lions tv and radio networks
You're un-notable and they should delete you. i spent alot of time on those articles. leave my articles alone. youre just against them just like the rest of the mainstream media. TomCat4680 (talk) 18:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism
Please stop vandalizing the Detroit Lions article. If you hate them so much put your opinions on a forum.TomCat4680 (talk) 18:12, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Notability


 * bullshit they do have reliable sources, they're under "sources". learn how to read. leave my articles alone. I'll take this issue to third party arbitration. The networks are notable (especially the radio one) because Lions games started to get blacked out this year and loyal fans who can't afford to go to games have to listen on the radio. Just cause the Lions haven't been to a Super Bowl doesn't mean you should remove anything that would tell people how to people to watch / listen to them.

TomCat4680 (talk) 18:24, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Context?
Why this edit? The article did not conform to Wikipedia's conventions, but the topic of the article was identified with complete clarity. No one could have read it without knowing what it was about. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:07, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

New straw poll
You are a user who responded to Use of logos on sports team pages. As someone interested in the discussion a new straw poll has been laid out to see where we currently stand with regards to building a consensus. For the sake of clarity, please indicate your support or opposition (or neutrality) to each section, but leave discussion to the end of each section. — BQZip01 — talk 23:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Banknotes of Zimbabwe edits.
Hello, I wish to tell you about the recent developments in regards to the use Zimbabwean banknotes on Wikipedia. May I make it clear that banknotes that were withdrawn before and on 31 December 2008 fall under clause 50 of the Copyright Act of Zimbabwe, Chapter 26:1, therefore the images are in the public domain because it is one of the following:
 * An image of a banknote which has been demonetized in terms of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Act Chapter 22:10 or
 * An image of a coin or the artistic work defining the design of a coin.

The actual text reads: "the term of such copyright shall be the period from the date on which such bank notes or coin are issued until such bank notes or coin are demonetized in terms of the said Act." Theoretically this means that notes up to the second dollar are in public domain and do not fall under fair use rules. By the way, I draw your attention to this debate. --Marianian (talk) 20:21, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Edit summaries
Hey. Just FYI regarding your edits to Shane (films). I know that we all forget to do this, can you add an edit summary when you delete or add more than 500 charactors or so? It'll make recent changes patrolling much, much easier, because the wiki-ware records such large, summaryless edits as "high risk". Thanks. --Call me Bubba (talk) 21:44, 12 January 2009 (UTC)



TomCat4680 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

TomCat4680 (talk) 14:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Remington-homes
I've removed your report to WP:UAA - simply having a corporate name as a username is not, of itself, a reason for blocking. Acting in a promotional manner is, however, but Remington hadn't done that - their only page (although speedily deleted as a copyvio) wasn't promoting any particular person or entity. GbT/c 13:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Think about this
thinking about this


 * I have thought about it many times, and you're right.  The same thing could be said of just about any unfree image used on Wikipedia.  The fact that German Wikipedia thrives while excluding unfree content, proves that unfree images are not essential.   Part of the difficulty is that the terms of use of unfree images is open to interpretation, and while some editors take a lenient line others are more stringent in its application, but it still comes down to interpretation of the policy.  I assume you're referring to the picture of Doris Tate and George Bush in the Sharon Tate article?  Personally, I think that are comprehensive featured article such as Sharon Tate can hold a limited number of unfree images as part of its comprehensiveness, if they are chosen for a specific purpose, as these ones are.   That's not to say that the text would not be understood without the images, but the images make it stronger.   The images in this article address points in the text and so they serve a stronger purpose than many decorative images that are tolerated and, in some cases,  even endorsed by the community.  For example we could understand most album articles without an album cover illustration, and yet they exist in the majority of articles - we even request them when they are not added, and this is despite the fact that the album cover is almost never discussed.   Same with films and film posters, books and book covers etc.  I think the images in the Sharon Tate article are used with more care and more relevance, but because they don't sit neatly in a little box, they are questioned.   But yes, I could easily understand most articles without a picture. Rossrs (talk) 14:02, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Feedback
As a user who responded to the straw poll regarding non-free images in sports, your further input is requested with regards to the Straw poll summary and proposed guidelines on image use — BQZip01 —  talk 00:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

No content in Category:Pages containing media that could be copied to Commons
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Pages containing media that could be copied to Commons, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Pages containing media that could be copied to Commons has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Pages containing media that could be copied to Commons, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 00:31, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

TSN2 HD logo
Hi, this is in regards to the removal of the TSN2 HD logo in the TSN2 article. I'm not interested in getting into any edit war here, but in regard to that image, it is relevant to article. TSN2 HD is discussed, it is perfectly fine to have a logo of the subject being discussed. I've reverted the edit and created a section in the article specifically for TSN2 HD where the logo is placed. musimax. (talk) 02:47, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my flub.
. I then moved the page to User talk:Abd/Notices/Comments, and added a redirect from User talk:Abd/Notices to this lower Talk page. The idea is that someone can watch just the notices, or comment on the notices, or both. It's part of a structural concept. Thanks again. --Abd (talk) 16:31, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Flight 3407
I wasn't referring to a cite. "Unreferenced" just meant the two codes weren't used in the article. The only airport codes in the entire article are part a caption (which uses the full name as well), a reference (same, plus it's part of the formal title), and "BUF", which isn't even the ICAO version. They clutter up the lede, don't clarify anything, and are only of tangential interest in an article about a flight, not the airports. The flight codes aren't even in the lede (9J or CRC 3407 and CO 3407), so why should the airport codes be there? I don't revert anything except blatant vandalism, so please feel free to fix it. Or not. Pat (talk) 20:26, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Removal of information and images?
Hey. I was just wondering, why have you removed a huge chunk of information and images from here when it was relevantly sourced and it was useful info? According to many Swedes it is the best opening at to Melodifestivalen yet. I haven't had time to add info about the interval acts in Heat 1 or 2 yet but I was planning on doing it before Saturday. Surely this information should be included. If we talk about the opening act at Eurovision, why not talk about the opening act at the biggest Swedish programme annually? The revision I am referring to is this. Thanks for taking the tine to read this. ńăŧħăń -  ŧăłķ  20:17, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

PD-Kopimi
There are some problems with this license. People using the "kopimi" license have clearly not released their work into the public domain, as that is not what it says. Instead, they have given permission for reuse. Do you have any evidence that use of it also allows "freedom to make changes and improvements, and to distribute derivative works"? If it only allows redistribution rights and not the creation of free derivatives, then it is unfree, and works with that license will need a fair use rationale. Dominic·t 20:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Thing Thing Arena 3
Just a friendly note on Thing Thing Arena 3. Software isn't eligible for speedy deletion under A7, so I declined the speedy. Feel free to prod or take to AfD. Cheers!-- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  18:24, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

TV Links
Hi ViperSnake,

Your latest edits of the TV Links article have brought it back to the cite sources and assert claims that have been debated and suggested on its talk page as being false and unreliable, please use the the talk page to debate them and any other major changes you may wish to do. Thanks --bitbit (pka Nezek) (talk) 20:20, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Image links in ((ombox))
Hi ViperSnake151. I have left a message for you at Template talk:Ombox.

--David Göthberg (talk) 03:53, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
- Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 05:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

'Furu' is not a word
The understanding I have is that obviously the article title can't be the Kanji of the game's title. However 'Furu' is not a translation of the Kanji, it's a sounding-out of it... which is a best effort speaking of the word 'Full' in Japanese. There are no Ls in Japanese phonetics. The word 'Furu' is the word Full. Just like it's Oha Star Dance Dance Revolution and not 'Sta' which is the sounding-out of the Kanji in that game's title (And Oha is simply an onomatopoeia, there's no English word to turn it into). It just makes more sense to have an article titled after what they were trying to say instead of what they actually said. You should see what the Kanji translates into for Disney's World Dancing Museum ^_-. æron phone home  13:41, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Texas Chain Saw Massacre article
Please see the comments on the talk page about the video game image. The current consensus is that there is not a need for an image to begin with, as well as the fact that any commentary must be on the image itself not the game.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  00:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

BlackBerry Storm Article
Sorry, I don't see how this is promotional material considering this is what makes this device so much more indifferent that a regular commercial touch screen device. I've rewritten this portion so that it is in a more neutral pov. JenniferHeartsU (talk) 02:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

April 1 POTD
Hey I know you meant well, but that pic wasn't even up for discussion at April Fool's Main Page/Today's Featured Picture.  howcheng  {chat} 05:08, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

San Saba (film)
Just a friendly note on San Saba (film). I declined the A1 speedy deletion request because there's plenty of context. (Not only does the article say it's a film, but it even tells us the stars). It may not be notable, but that would be prod or AfD, not speedy. Cheers!-- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  22:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Template GFDL-1.2
Hi ViperSnake151; I've removed the editprotected tag from, as I think it should be reviewed at WP:TFD first, or at the very least should be put up for speedy deletion instead of using editprotected to request deletion. I'll let you make the deletion request since you know more about it than I do. --CapitalR (talk) 07:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

WNEU
Ok, ok, I think he was just blowing off steam. NBC will never open an O&O in Boston. They are having enough problems with the O&Os they have. There's a good chance this Leno thing could fail. They would end up spending more money on an NBC O&O than they would lose if WHDH simply did not air Leno. Remember NBC made this mistake once here where I live. Our own WSVN use to be an NBC station and made a similar move in 1987 where NBC purchased a station here. 20 years later we have WTVJ our NBC O&O in the last place being everything. Meanwhile, WSVN is on top of the market. --Grahambrunk (talk) 14:44, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
–Drilnoth (T • C) 12:12, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
–Drilnoth (T • C) 02:12, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
–Drilnoth (T • C) 02:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello Pappy scandal
OK, please explain that. The cited clause is ungrammatical. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:16, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Please comment as requested on the GA review page. There are several other Tagalog references that need translation. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:18, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Copyright
Thank you very much for your reply. You wrote that most lists are not eligible for any form of copyright period. Can you please explain to me what that means? Thank you very much!

Mbakkel2 (talk) 09:34, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your information. You mentioned the US Law. Do other countries have similar laws concerning parliamentary speakers and copyright?

Mbakkel2 (talk) 14:25, 12 April 2009

New DDR Navbox
If you have a minute, can you take a look at this and tell me if it's better/worse than the current layout? Specifically the Main series group. æron phone home  22:19, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Rock Revolution GA Review
I have failed Rock Revolution. See: Talk:Rock Revolution/GA1.-- Gears of War  2  (NGG) 01:26, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Amalthea 18:21, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No comment on this? -- Amalthea 00:26, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Rap City
" Before adding a category to an article, please make sure that the subject of the article really belongs in the category that you specified. If it has not been already, it may be removed if the category has not been deemed correct for the subject matter.   What does it have to do with self-censorship?"

I don't know if you ever watch Rap City but their is a lot of self-censorship and corporate censorship on the show. Thats how Rap City and self-censorship are related.

Template:Infobox McDonald's‎‎
Hi. I looked at all the article pages where the infobox was used, and I agree with your interpretation of NFCC 8 and the use of the logo. I have modified the template accordingly, and all of the pages using the template. The only place where the trademarked logo appears now is on McDonald's and List of McDonald's trademarks — both appropriate, don't you think? Since that (hopefully) resolves the logo part of the TfD justification, I would appreciate it if you would remove/strike-out that portion of the justification, unless you still feel there is an issue that needs to be resolved on it.

I still don't understand your concern about "prose" in the template space. I understand that the template space is not where article content should be stored, but this is an infobox pre-filled with information about the company. This provides consistency and useful information across a series of articles. All of those articles could be merged into a single, excessively long article, and the infobox would make total sense there. It still makes sense to me including it on each of the smaller articles, since it helps tie the related articles together. By "prose" do you mean that it contains too much static information and not enough dynamic information that is applicable to each individual page on which it's implemented? I can see that as a possible issue. Personally, I think it might be nice to have that full infobox displayed on the main article, some sections of it suppressed on sub-articles, and some new fields that relate more closely to the topic of the article. In other words, keep the core information available on every page, omit the superfluous stuff where it's not needed, and include places for more dynamic content. That sounds good to me, but the place to discuss that is on the template's talk page. I don't see that you even attempted such dialog. Instead, you recommended deletion without a clear reason (at least to me) as to why it was unfixably inappropriate. One of your justifications was fixed in about 6 edits. The other is equally fixable (assuming my interpretation of your prose comment was accurate), though it probably will take more than 6 edits to do so.

Jerem43 and I are quite willing to work on fixing template problems. But it is highly disheartening to have templates we have worked so hard on being nominated for deletion without even being given a chance to improve them first. (Note: I didn't actually work on this template prior to TfD, but being a member of the WikiProject Food and Drink, I am happy to offer my support as needed.) I mention this so that you know we are committed, active participants and editors who care, not newbies blindly creating inappropriate content. :-) Have a good weekend! -- Will scrlt ( →“¡¿Talk?!” ) 17:26, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

logos
I looked and I can't see where it says logos aren't allowed in Infox boxes and by the way then all logos should be removed from the info box then. B64 (talk) 00:07, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't think people would get confused by having the corporate logo listed on the subsitary page. I think we should have ask people where or not to have the Corporate logo. Since this site is mojarity supported and I do think there should be consensus until then.B64 (talk) 02:41, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

You tube
From WP:YOUTUBE: ''Most YouTube videos containing copyrighted material (outside of the official YouTube channels of organizations and entertainment/news media companies) do not have permission of the copyright owners. Each such link must be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis.''

Even the guideline you link to argues that inclusion of such material should be judged on a case by case basis. I am fully aware of the reluctance to link to You Tube and the like, and with good reason, however in this specific case, the video (which is very easily justifiable as fair use, and yes, I am fully aware that Wikipedia's policies are stricter than US and Canadian fair use law) adds significant value to the article, especially as words alone cannot sufficiently convey the scope of the incident in the way the video can. As such, in the case of Punch-up in Piestany, I have restored the link, and I would ask that you not remove it again without consensus support to do so. Thanks, Resolute 14:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough on the present removal and asking for comment on the talk page, I'll leave that as is. We could ask related wikiprojects to weigh in on the issue, however I suspect most will answer based on the link's value to the topic rather than its justification under Wikipedia's copyright policies.  Similarly, the anti-You Tube brigade would comment that it should be removed simply for being a You Tube link.  So I may just leave it as is for now, with your argument and my argument present, and if interested people wander in and comment on the copyright issue, we can weigh it then. Resolute 15:43, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

A7 and schools
Notable or not, an article has certain minimum requirements, verifiability and sources independent from the subject are one of those. If it can't be deleted per A7, then those other reasons should be sufficient. Also, if something is highly controversial, then keeping it outright is just as bad an idea as speedy deleting it. The exception for schools is a recent addition to the A7 criterion and did not receive any sort of consensus so it shouldn't be there. WP:ORG has widespread consensus and does apply. - Mgm|(talk) 07:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * P.S. I've done some spelling fixes on the message on your main userpage. If these mistakes were intentional, please feel free to revert them. - Mgm|(talk) 07:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

More on caps
Another source for capitalization standards is WikiProject Albums. WP:ALBUMCAPS has info as well as a link to even more detailed info. I follow the naming convention because while it doesn't say song titles and artists specifically there are others that undo transliterated titles and as I said they look nicer and easier for people who are not familiar with the series to read. Plus DDR games should be regarded as playable albums and the list of songs in addition to the official soundtracks should follow the standard set by all other album articles. æron phone home  03:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: T-rappville salt denial
Well, it was still only two re-creations under that specific title. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 16:05, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Template:wi
Hi Vipersnake, I'm curious what your rationale was for this change to wi. I don't have a problem with it per se, I'm just wondering why it was done.

To be honest, I kind of liked the old version because it was a little more garish, and thus a little more likely to get people's attention and deter them from trying to start an article in pages where there shouldn't be one (like Idk). The current version is a little less eye-catching and looks a little more like it would be a routine system message. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 19:47, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Just checking in to see if you got this message... r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs

Eurovision Controvessy
Hi Viper. I've left U a longer message on the Eurovision page but suffice to say that I've taken your advice and massively toned down the Controvessy notes. I showed it to a journalist friend who agrees that it is completely impartial and I hopr that it meets with your approval. Obviously you are welcome to have another go but I think I've covered all the facts and sourced my refernces without being sensationalst. Best wishes, Mark--Mapmark (talk) 21:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Deletion
WP:CSD states that pages are exempt if they are "deletion discussions that are not logged elsewhere, user and user talk pages, talk page archives, plausible redirects that can be changed to valid targets, and image pages or talk pages for images that exist on Wikimedia Commons." In my opinion, the talk page did not meet any of those criterion, so I feel the deletion was appropriate. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 16:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
–Drilnoth (T • C • L) 20:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
–Drilnoth (T • C • L) 20:29, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Fair use rationale for File:KlarsfeldCouple.jpg
I believe that i have already provided the fair use rationale or reason for fair use in the image description page. I assume that you did not bother to read it properly, else you would have found it.

Fair use rationale: The photograph is copyrighted, and cannot be used without the expressed permission of Beate and Serge Klarsfeld. It is used by Wikipedia for educational purposes only, to illustrate the subject of a biographical article on Beate and Serge Klarsfeld, with the permission of Beate Klarsfeld. Permission granted by email from Beate Klarsfeld to Joyson Noel on June 30, 2008: "You can use the photo. Best regards, Beate Klarsfeld."

As such, i have removed the speedy deletion tag. Joyson Noel (talk) 10:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Win98.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Win98.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Formal Mediation for Sports Logos
As a contributor to Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/RFC_on_use_of_sports_team_logos, you have been included in a request for formal mediation regarding the subject at Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos. With your input and agreement to work through mediation, it is hoped we can achieve a lasting solution. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Templates for deletion nomination of Template:Copy images to Commons
Template:Copy images to Commons has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. - ALLST✰R ▼ echo wuz here @ 02:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Powerglove
An article that you have been involved in editing, Powerglove, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. You previously, wanted to keep this article... claiming they had multiple indepentant sources establishing notability. I'm only seeing online website reviews which are not published, unless I'm missing something. Comments welcome. Cazbahrocker (talk) 06:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

black/African American
I really do not see the harm in changing "African American" to "black." It is more concise and certainly fairer, unless we change all instances of the term "white" to "Caucasian American." 68.126.3.17 (talk) 00:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

LoveGame
Why did you nominate this article when you haven't worked on it a bit? You need to explain yourself. --Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 03:46, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes consensus is required when a single person is not working on the article. Also the article is far from ready for GA. And may I ask how come suddenly you are so interested in the article? How much of contribution have you imparted for the article? Donot take credit for something which you haven't worked on. It just goes on to show bad thoughts. --Legolas  ( talk 2 me ) 13:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

VMware_Workstation.png deletion
Hi, I replied. SF007 (talk) 03:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

thank you
thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffmeck22 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

CALogo.png
Hi there,

Could I get some details on your challenge to CALogo.png being fair use to use on wikipedia? Admittedly I am not familiar with all the rules of wikipedia, but it seems logical to me that since I own the logo and I put a note in the discussion page for the image saying "Yes, I put this here and I approve of it being here", then it should be fine, shouldn't it?

Thanks, Andrew —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gurudata (talk • contribs) 15:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I'm still a bit confused though. I already have a box in there called "Non-free media use rationale - non-free logo for The Constellation Awards" which I thought addressed everything that is asked for in the link that you sent me. Is there something specific missing? Is the whole thing "wrong"? Are you looking for something completely different? I'm sorry if I seem clueless here, but... well, when it comes to this stuff I am! I just want to permit wikipedia to use this image I own when discussing The Constellation Awards (which I also "own"), any help you can offer on how to do that would be appreciated!

Thanks, Andrew

--guru (talk) 18:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: What is wrong
Im sorry but i have know idea what your talking about? Salavat (talk) 16:16, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright, no problem. Salavat (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Internet Watch Foundation and Wikipedia
Hi there. Some time back in March you nominated this article at GAN. Arsenikk reviewed it in May. Arsenikk appears to be inactive on wikipedia at present, but you seem still to be around. Do you want to respond to the points in the review and see if it will pass for GA? Let me know, as I may initiate a discussion at GA to take over from Arsenikk and complete the review process. Regards. hamiltonstone (talk) 04:46, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Files for deletion/2009 July 11
Poor edit. The debate was closed legitimately, the image was restored when it should not have been. Basically, this comes down to the uploader not being happy his image was deleted; that's not a reason to overturn a closure without discussion. J Milburn (talk) 14:49, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Recent unwatched changes
Hey, I noticed that you voted oppose at the Recent unwatched changes proposal. The proposal is not to list all unwatched pages, but to provide it as part of recent changes, in order of last-edited. From earlier in the discussion, "While technically true, any such vandalism would land the vandal with a kick to the pants, since their edit would float to the very top of this slow-moving list." If by editing the hit list their edit moves to the top where it is easier to notice, it seems that it would be harder to vandalize these pages, not easier. Perhaps I'm missing something, or is that more clear?   M   01:34, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Discographies
I have a question and I hope you can help me. Are discographies included in the copyright legislation? Thank you very much!

Mbakkel2 (talk) 16:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Afd
See here. You had to know before you submitted this page that this would never meet our standards for notability or reliability. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 99% of that coverage is from unreliable blogs, the rest is duplication of the same four facts. That is not notability. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:BLP applies. The standards of reliability under BLP are quite different than standard. Most of those that you claim as reliable are blogs hosted by normal newspapers. They contain opinions, not facts. The only "facts" in there would boil down to two sentences. You have also breached WP:UNDUE. This is a content fork, and a POV content fork. I can go on, but you are breaching many, many guidelines and policies right now. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:53, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Did I mention "one event"? No. I stated BLP. BLP applies to -all- pages dealing with living subjects. It states that sources must be extremely reliable. Not somewhat reliable. These sources fail BLP standards. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I said 99% unreliable. The BCC only contains to what amounts to two sentences on wiki. Any more is speculative and inappropriate. The information is the same provided in all of the other reliable sources. Thus, no notability. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:38, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Though I don't really care all that much, your comment "admin decided, what he says goes" in the edit summary is incorrect. Admins are users trusted with a few extra buttons because the community has decided we aren't vandals and aren't likely to delete the main page or block Jimbo.  Admins are not gods or absolute monarchs - just because an admin closes an AFD doesn't mean that the decision isn't completely wrong and that an out of process close can't be overturned.  It's obvious that this article is going to exist at some point in time, but closing a contentious debate early only contributes to bad blood - it's better to let the thing run. --B (talk) 03:47, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Minor edit usage
Please remember to mark your edits as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.'

This edit was not a minor edit, and you did not give a reason for your edit. You also removed Pictures of relevant content matter, such as pictures of Allaire Homesite, which has been discussed as prior art.Scientus (talk) 00:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * continuation of discussion.Scientus (talk) 00:56, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

On your proposal to blank AFD

 * For better or worse, it is best that the discussion at Articles for deletion/National Portrait Gallery copyright conflicts remain visible, so all may see the discourse on the topic. Doubtless, the article will come up for review in the future, and best that those who care may see what is different and the same about the conversation the next time around. It is not a courtesy to hide a community discussion. -- Yellowdesk (talk) 02:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Email
I'd like to send you an email, but your email is not enabled. JoshuaZ (talk) 21:53, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content
FYI. This RFC is based on, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jack Merridew/Blood and Roses which you participated in. Ikip (talk) 00:14, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:CCPermissionNeeded
Template:CCPermissionNeeded has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for deletion page. Thank you. ViperSnake151  Talk  14:52, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

FSD
Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. TomCat4680 (talk) 21:52, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. TomCat4680 (talk) 21:58, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Please discuss this on Talk:Fox Sports Detroit. TomCat4680 (talk) 22:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

1959 Brisbane TV schedule
I believe these don't full under the deletion policy because they can be used for educational and historical purposes

Fdw-noncom-deleted
The request got lost somewhere on RFPP, but I've unprotected it after talking to the original protecting admin Martinp23. -Royalguard11 (T) 20:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Chrome 3.0.195.25 Wikipedia.PNG licensing
You changed the template for licensing from non free to BSD. However, doesn't BSD only apply to the source code and not the actual compiled executable?--Michaelkourlas (talk) 20:55, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

MS Eeggs
Seems Easter eggs in Microsoft products has become more wikipedic since last year. Perhaps it could now be flagged "humor" and the WP:howto dropped altogether, or put in any appropriate sub-section (i.e. WinXP), if need be. MornMore (talk) 17:40, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Self-citation
Template:Self-citation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. <b style="color:#3773A5;">Cyber</b> cobra (talk) 01:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

"Phineas and Ferb's Christmas Vacation"
Hey; saw you created this article and I have to say very nice work so far. :) However, I, personally, do not think it's ready to be created yet — this is simply based on the fact that it hasn't aired yet, which I believe is a no-no as per WP:Crystal ball. Therefore, I'd suggest moving it to your sandbox, but that's just me. Also, I'd like to note that I've also had plans on creating the article and would love to collaborate with you on it. (Which, like I said, I think would be best put off until it comes out next month)

Cheerio, and keep up the great work. :)  The Flash  <sup style="color:black;">{talk} 23:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright, like I said, it was just a mere suggestion. Oh, and if you're referring to the Wikinews articles, those were written by me, lol.  The Flash  <sup style="color:black;">{talk} 02:03, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Your DYK suggestion is good to go, but I'm going to save it for Christmas Day's (December 25) DYKs, as I think it's more appropriate for Christmas. Do consider expanding at that time, though. MuZemike 18:06, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

1959 Brisbane TV schedule
I believe these don't full under the deletion policy because they can be used for educational and historical purposes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bruce65 (talk • contribs) 08:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Re:The Doof
Sure thing. He was actually going to be my next PaF project now that I've finished Perry, but two heads are better then one. :) Here's an old revision of my sandbox a while back during a failed attempt to create his page. It's got a lot of info on his voice and creation, so tell me what you think of those.  The Flash  <sup style="color:black;">{talk} 23:33, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Solar TV
I merged to Radio Philippines Network. for that and the deletion was been a redirect. Gabbyshoe - 05:59, 23 November 2009 (PST)

RfD nomination of Barakc Obama
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. — The Man in Question (gesprec)  10:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Re:Xmas Vacation page
That's a good point. I've made a sandbox containing a strong lead and a skeleton for the body of the article that we can work on to get it ready.  The Flash  <sup style="color:black;">{talk} 15:32, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've added a plot summary for the article (at a decent length per WP:MOSTV) so the article is presentable enough now. We still need to get cracking at filling in the skeleton on my sandbox.  The Flash  <sup style="color:black;">{talk} 18:27, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Re:Mom! Phineas and Ferb made me an encyclopedia article!
Yeah, definitely. Do you want to start a sandbox?  The Flash  <sup style="color:black;">{talk} 17:47, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, lol, cool. Mind if I add a full lead/infobox?  The Flash  <sup style="color:black;">{talk} 17:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright, I've added the lead, the infobox, and a skeleton for the body.  The Flash  <sup style="color:black;">{talk} 18:31, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Hola :)
Español: Hola amigo wikipedista podrias mejorar el articulo Deysi Cori (This appears to be English Wikipedia's first article created in the year 2010). Saludos, cordialmente Globalphilosophy (talk)  00:47, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

GNUnify
GNUnify is a World Fame Open Source Event organized in India, which have featured almost all the big names of Open Source Including RMS, C-founder of Apache, MySQL, and various other speakers from Intel Mozilla and many more —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarji (talk • contribs) 04:42, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Please check i am adding references and adding more info to the page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagarji (talk • contribs) 17:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Criteria for speedy deletion (Human Readable Version)
Criteria for speedy deletion (Human Readable Version), a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (Human Readable Version) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Criteria for speedy deletion (Human Readable Version) during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. --A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 02:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of 3 in a Row
I have nominated 3 in a Row, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/3 in a Row. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 03:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Re Talk:NetResult
I've declined the speedy deletion tag you placed on this article. As a general rule, comments on talk pages are held to a less stringent standard than material in articles; I wouldn't delete a talk page unless there was a really strong reason. The material I saw didn't meet the "nonsense" guideline, which is quite specific. "The basic rule ... is, that you should not strike out or delete the comments of other editors without their permission." I agree that the material in question only seemed tangentially useful, but it wasn't offensive. If you have any questions or problems, feel free to leave me a note. Accounting4Taste: talk 22:50, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Please use Edit Summary
An edit you made was reverted by me, mainly it looked disruptive and there was no reason in the "Edit Summary". If this is a mistake and your edit has purpose, Please carry on, But this would not of happend if you explained your edit. Thank you  Mlpearc  MESSAGE  16:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit in Question Here  Mlpearc  MESSAGE  16:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Questions About the Article Editing
Hi

I had edited the IBM Lotus Domino/Inotes/Traveler/Forms articles. But all of them have been restored to the old versions.

Your reason says it as "Promotional content". But I believe they are of general information & as per Wiki guidelines.

Any suggestions or information about how to make them more compliant with Wiki guidelines are welcome.

Thanks

"Cathode22 (talk) 09:15, 28 April 2010 (UTC)"

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 01:17, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

VPC
— raeky  T  23:48, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Handy Light
A tag has been placed on Handy Light requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Stifle (talk) 19:51, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Handy Light


The article Handy Light has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Does not appear to be a notable software product.

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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stifle (talk) 08:02, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Handy_Light


The article Handy_Light has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Does not appear to be a notable software product.

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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. <span style="border:3px solid grey;background:black;padding:1px;color:gold;text-shadow:white 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em"> ℳ ono   20:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Handy Light
I have nominated Handy Light, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Handy Light. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Stifle (talk) 12:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:NASA logo
Template:NASA logo has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

NewsWatch (Philippine TV program)
Hi

Can you please add an explanation to Talk:NewsWatch_(Philippine_TV_program) giving the problems leading to you adding the contradict tag to the article.

If the article is no longer in need of the tag can you please remove it.

thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 23:55, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: Bell Internet
I'll agree with you that a copyvio shouldn't be allowed, but it affects more than Bell. It also affects Telus, Rogers, etc which is why one article makes sense so we can add it to the see also of the relevant articles. Me-123567-Me (talk) 13:37, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:PD-art-US-1996
Template:PD-art-US-1996 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

ESPN
I'm with you on a split... Here are my components:


 * History of ESPN
 * ESPN, Inc.
 * ESPN significant programming rights
 * Criticism of ESPN already exists but may be of concern. Raymie (t • c) 03:54, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Removal
Please do not remove huge part of an article like you just did without discussing it first. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:50, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of NetResult for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article NetResult 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/NetResult 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. PaoloNapolitano (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of NetResult for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article NetResult 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/NetResult 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. PaoloNapolitano (talk) 17:43, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: Changes
Your edits to Discovery World HD were full of spelling and grammar mistakes and removed valid information from the infobox, you may want to think before you edit and revert changes that someone else made. Just a tip. 99.253.251.176 (talk) 16:34, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: June 2011
I am not in an edit war. Could you please explain to me how that is the case? I was not technically "reverting" anyone's edits. I was doing minor grammar and spelling edits to fix valid and clear mistakes. And a few times adding information into the article which was taken out by edits, which are valid information to add. For example, I added the CORRECT link to the article for Discovery World TV channel and added rebranding dates into the infobox, which was correct and valid. I also find it interesting that the user who I am supposedly in an edit war with is warning me about being in a edit war. Maybe it should be the other way around because that user (you) were reverting valid and correct edits. Who's disrupting here? Hmmm.... 99.253.251.176 (talk) 01:52, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Versus
Replied on my page. Let's discuss over there, as we started there. - Penwhale &#124; dance in the air and follow his steps 19:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

The Baseball Network
First of all, the changes/additions that you made to this particular page was riddled with spelling if not also grammatical errors. Secondly, go on YouTube and look for the clip from NBC's opening from the 1994 Major League Baseball All-Star Game from Pittsburgh (which was also the premiere broadcast for The Baseball Network) if you want further evidence/proof of what I've been describing. How exactly is trying to illustrated the production (I don't feel that we should look for official confirmation in print via a news source in regards to whether or not the theme music was considered "bombastic", just listen to it) for the Baseball Network joint-venture considered "fancruft"!? BornonJune8 (talk) 10:41 p.m., 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:WTOL-logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:WTOL-logo.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. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * 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) 18:21, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Cliff Hangers for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cliff Hangers 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/Cliff Hangers (3rd nomination) 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. --Gh87 (talk) 11:40, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of My EBT


A tag has been placed on My EBT requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance 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. Vrenator (talk) 15:40, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

My EBT
Restored. I'd recommend getting a few more sources. It may have cleared speedy on further review, but it doesn't mean it'll clear AfD. Kwsn  (Ni!)  22:07, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Old-70 listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Old-70. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Old-70 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:19, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Kopimi images
Category:Kopimi images, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 03:28, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Template:Non-free video game screenshot listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Non-free video game screenshot. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Non-free video game screenshot redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:53, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Non-free PD-US-NoTreaty
Template:Non-free PD-US-NoTreaty has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:03, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Versus (TV channel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Iditarod (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) 10:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

NBC Sports Network
The citation lines were poorly formated and really didn't work or had much use from my point of view at least. BornonJune8 (talk 04:59 p.m., 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Toolbox.com, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Human resource (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) 11:30, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Dick Clark's New Year's Rockin' Eve with Ryan Seacrest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Traffic cop (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) 11:07, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * FUN Technologies (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Online gaming


 * Game Show Network (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Social gaming

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Windows 8, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page C Sharp (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) 10:17, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

SkyCable
Hi, I would like to seek your help regarding the article SkyCable. User Webwires who I think the long-term editor and maintainer of the article is insisting that the page is for the cable TV brand. But don't you think it is better [for Wikipedia] if we relegate the article into the company ones and for all? Instead of the cable TV brand, we could assign it to the company and moved skycable, skybroadband, etc... into sub articles. Also a concern of mine is the tone of the page. Obviously Wikipedia is not a directory nor a place to advertise a cable service, don't you think we should make the article more encyclopedic? Thank you. I hope we could make Wikipedia a better place. -My Page (Contact me) 12:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)