User talk:Wolcott

Welcome
Hello, , and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Geniac 16:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC) -
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Re. Patrick Kisnorbo/Max Gradel
Pretty rude that to be fair, I do my best to update the Leeds players pages, as many of the Leeds players have been neglected and had no information in (although the Kisnorbo page has been excellently put together). The information is always correct, usually regarding games they have played in etc, goals they have scored. I dont know how to include the reference links,I have asked if I can get assistance with this issue before, but to be honest I cant be bothered anymore if people are going to be so rude about it.

Battle of Sarimbun Beach
Hi, I appreciate your contrbutions on the Battle of Singapore articles and read them with interest. I was just wondering what you think the scope of the Sarimbun battle should be. My impression is that the Japanese primary objective in the Sarimbun landings was Tengah Airfield. On that basis the article on the battle should conclude with the capture of the airfield around midday on February 9 and not include the fighting on the Bulim line. What do you think? Grant | Talk 17:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Slim River
Hi Wolcott thanks for doing those adjustments on this article, i forgot to remove the stubs. I see you're from Singapore, just wondering whether you would have access to more images or better maps to improve the article? Tristan benedict 14:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello Tristan, unfortunately I do not have any images or maps relating to the battle of slim river. My sources come from the Imperial War Museum and Australian War Memorial. Perhaps if i do find something relevant, i will post it on that article. Wolcott 20 August 2007

That would be great if you did find something for above, I do like photos they make an article much better. About the casualty figure for Battle of Malaya, i was reading Colin Smith today and worked out that the Japanese losses were very similar on Malaysia as they were on Singapore itself. 3,506 killed all together and 6,150 wounded. On Singapore he puts the casualties as 1,713 killed and 2,772 wounded (which i haven't checked or changed on Battle of Singapore. For the Commonwealth he puts the casualties as 7,500 killed, 10,000 wounded and about 120,000 pow for the whole campaign. Unfortunately he doesn't divide the Commonwealth figure into those on Singapore and those on the mainland Have you found different figures? All these figures are on page 547 of Singapore Burning. Tristan benedict 17:13, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I saw an exact figure for Japanese casualties on a personal website, which appears to be gone. But since u found some info, I shall make the changes. As for the commonwealth casualties, ill seperate the figure according to history's estimation. One thing I do know is that the allies lost more than 3000 troops in Malaya, as I have noted in the Battle of Muar article. So the Battle of Singapore was definitely a less bloody campaign. Wolcott

The numbers seem to make more sense now. The Commonwealth figures are always going to be an estimate i reckon due to the confusion of retreat and the lack of information gathered at the time, but what you've put down looks good. Yeah, Battle of Singapore a lot less bloody. Too short a fight for heavy casualties! Tristan benedict 09:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that my computer crashed mid edit, i didn't realize it left that mess behind. Tristan benedict 20:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I actually expected a bot to fix that but no one did. Anyway I couldn't find any pictures relating to the battle of Slim River, so I posted some relevant ones instead. Wolcott

Those pictures look good. Nice finds. Tristan benedict 19:13, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

war of the worlds
vincent and julio are killed by the tripod's heat ray. i watched it for the first time in ages the other day and you can clearly see both of them get hit by it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.226.132.77 (talk) 20:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid u shud watch it again. Vincent and Julio ran to the right of the screen as soon as we see Ray running, disappearing from view. They never ran in the same direction as Ray and the others did. Wolcott 06:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Alex Spade 05:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Source still is needed. The source is needed always for verification by others, it is unimportant when the file was loaded. Alex Spade 18:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Since you uploaded the image, you may be the only person who can fill in the source information. Just add a sentence to the image description page saying where you got the image from. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 13:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

U may notice that the date in which I uploaded the image was almost a year ago. May I know why is this image being singled out out of the many unsourced images on wikipedia? Wolcott 10:21, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


 * It's not being singled out; many images with no source are being tagged, and many images with no use rationale are being tagged. In general, the entire collection of nonfree images is slowly being cleaned up to conform to WP:NFCC.  &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 11:42, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, your search of unsourced images (although uploaded long b4 source is required) is extremely slow. Do work harder as I was very displeased with the previous User who was seemingly victimizing that one image. Wolcott 15:14, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You uploaded this image on November 30, 2006. The source requirement has been present in the policy since at least Jan 1, 2006 . &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 15:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Well how come a bot never came to tag it the way they're doing it today then? Wolcott 18:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The bots are a relatively new phenomenon, which is why older images get tagged. The Wikimedia Foundation passed a resolution in March that has lead to an effort to clean up our old images. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 18:37, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

They sure are slow at tagging the old images. Wolcott 18:48, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, there was a large delay, and now there are too many to tag all at once. I notived you added a source, but it is quite vague - how did the image get from a presumably print version at the National Archives to a digital version on Wikipedia? If someone else wanted to look up the image in the national archives, is there a reference number they can use? &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 16:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I can't remember how I got the image, but I know it's from that website. Wolcott 08:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Alex Cisak
where did you get the info for his place of birth, d.o.b height etc. i'm not questioning it i just would like to be able to us the same site for future refrence.Skitzo, co-founder of the AfTaDaRkCrU 13:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I didn't create the page of Alex Cisak, Kasnie did. — Wolcott 14:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Brewster Buffalo
Hi Wolcott, you added that "two Dutch pilots, Jacob van Helsdingen and August Deibel, became aces on the Buffalo. They both recorded a total of three victories." The standard definition of a flying ace is five victories. Grant |  Talk  08:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I'll change that sentence immediately. Wolcott 22:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Ki 45 001.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Ki 45 001.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. TabooTikiGod 20:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

LCFC appearence stats
just to let you know i have updated the stats for tonights starting 11, the new figures are from soccerbase plus 1 more for tonights game, btw for any reply can you do it on my talk page please, cheers.Skitzo (talk) 20:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Marton Fulop
i think we are going to need to keep an eye on that as there are many conflicting stories about weather he is going to be recalled or not. Skitzo (talk) 18:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Luke O'Neill
Just to let you know I have begun working on an article for him here but obviously it hasn't gone live yet, so should he debut in the near future feel free to move it to the main database if you get to it 1st.

ps. there is also and Alex Cisak 1 here should he be loned out and debut in a fully pro league Skitzo (talk) 18:39, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Skitzouk, I'll keep that in mind when the time comes. Wolcott (talk) 19:11, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

feel free to edit them before hand too. Skitzo (talk) 20:04, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Hearts cup parade photo
I've removed it from the Vladimir Romanov article because the caption said that he was in the shot, which he wasn't. The photo could be some use in the Hearts article, or it could be cropped and used for the various players and coaches who are in the picture (eg Craig Gordon, Valdas Ivanauskas). Jmorrison230582 (talk) 15:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me to remove it from that article. I thought it was Romanov and not Ivanauskas. Wolcott (talk) 05:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Matthew Oakley
Please stop editing his honours - the implication of your version is that Oakley WON the FA Cup with Southampton in 2003 or that Derby County WON the championship in 2007, whereas he was on the losing side in the Cup Final (I know - I was there) and Derby only gained promotion by winning the play-offs. As for Steven Gerrard, as far as I can see, he actually won the various cups listed in those years or was in the championship winning side. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 10:04, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

As I've noted, his article is not the only one with those honours, won or not. But if you wish for Oakley's to be that way, fine, but I ask that you re-edit it as it doesn't look tidy. Either that or it'd be best removed, since he didn't win anything. Wolcott (talk) 12:00, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've removed the Championship play-off at Derby. Coming third is not the greatest of honours - only Steve Howard of the team that beat West Brom in the play-off final had this "honour" listed. I think the Cup Final should stay - getting to a Cup Final is the highest achievement of Oakley's career (so far) and Cup Final appearances tend to be listed for most players who are eligible, unless they actually won a significant number of trophies, such as Owen. Cheers.   Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 12:47, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Battle of Muar
Hi Wolcott, how are you doing? I'm back on Wikipedia after a long break. Thanks for moving that info. Seems to make more sense now. The Battle of Muar article is looking a lot better than when i last saw it, you've really done some good work on it. When was it last put up for peer review? I don't think it's a start article anymore, what do you think? I can add more references if you want. Any chance of finding a map for it? Tristan benedict (talk) 08:29, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello Tristan, I'm doing alright, thanks. I found some relevant sources & info over the past few days regarding the battle that I just couldn't ignore em. Never heard of peer review, but I certainly agree with ya it isn't a start article. I did find maps on the first reference, but I don't think they can be used on wiki (Have a look see ). Other than that, I can't find maps anywhere else. Sadly Wolcott (talk) 12:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Wow that is a very detailed source you've found there. Shame about the maps. I've added more info and a couple of references. Peer review is when you go to the wikiprojects listed on the article discussion page and ask them to review the article in order to change it's status. I'll tell the MilHistory project. Tristan benedict (talk) 14:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Cool, thanks Tristan. Now all we need is some public domain maps. I don't think some readers have any clue as to where the fightings took place! As for the refs, seeing as they're all from the same source, might I suggest you use this format, then use this to add citations to any more info coming from the book. Btw, this Captain Shiego Gotanda who commanded that tank company. Did he survive the battle? Wolcott (talk) 21:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Alright mate. Maps would be brilliant, and there are so many good ones on that AWM site (very frustrating!). As to references and citations, you're right we've got more than enough from one source! Very happy to back up from the others. The Milhistory project want us to add more sources anyway to get the page upgraded. As for Gotanda, I couldn't find any more out about him, but judging from the action i don't think he made it. But no evidence as to his fate yet. Smith has Yamashita giving the detachment a unit citation and saying it was a 'glorious death'. The pity about some of these Malaya campaign battles is the lack of info from the Japanese side of the battles. You would think the victors would have left behind more info! Tristan benedict (talk) 19:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

More sources? Well, there is the Parit Sulong Memorial which I placed under External Links, also showing a list of sources under Further Reading. I suppose we could use those and the site itself as additional sources? Glorious death, I see. Gotanda is as good as dead then. All the more reason to add him on the infobox, since he was in command of something during the battle. Perhaps the Japanese did leave behind info of their own. Only problem is that its not in English! Wolcott (talk) 22:22, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Wolcott i've added a whole load of references and citations and i found some info on the Japanese forces involved and their dispositions. Could you have a look at my citations and references i'm just getting the hang of them (duh!). Not so good at them yet. It is a very complicated battle! Do you think we can put the Gemas part of the battle up in the ambush section as it seems to be confusing reading when it is in the Muar section? Or separate it? Tristan benedict (talk) 20:35, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

The references and info are good, but I feel we may need to tidy up the reflist a little, looks messy. As for the Gemas part, move it to the Ambush section, because the Australians fought from the bridge to Gemas. Hopefully this time the Milhistory will finally grant this article a better rating. Thanks again, Tristan. Wolcott (talk) 22:29, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi mate. How are you doing? They've finally given it a better rating and i fixed all those horrible footnotes of mine. Now for the rest of the Battle of Malaya battles! Tristan benedict (talk) 22:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm alright. Thanks very much for the help. Great work on the article. Cheers. Wolcott (talk) 21:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 09:14, 9 April 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Radiant chains (talk) 09:14, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I beg your pardon, but this image was personally taken by me. Why is my own image being disputed for copyright? Wolcott (talk) 10:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Kisnorbo
Thanks for helping it become a GA. All I did was the lead and a couple of sources. Spiderone (talk) 16:21, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Marine 1.png
Do you have any more information about this photo?

I would like to find out where that child ended up, if possible. Worldruler20 (talk) 01:03, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't think it's possible to ascertain the fate of that child, as the photo was taken over 60 years ago. The description is all there is, and it was taken from its original source. Wolcott (talk) 04:30, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:GuyFawkes.JPG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GuyFawkes.JPG, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Clemence
Hello. First, I'm seriously impressed with how much improvement you've made to it. I've taken out the bit of trivia about his son. It'd be fine to say the couple have two (or have they got more by now?) children, with a source to prove it, but the biographies of living persons policy doesn't let us use unnecessary personal detail about kids. While I was there, I moved the personal info out of the lead and into its own section, which presumably you'd have been getting round to anyway, and added a ref for when he married Saunders. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Hopefully this article can push for a GA status soon. Wolcott (talk) 12:48, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

File:1996CupWinnersCup.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:1996CupWinnersCup.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Mosmof (talk) 06:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

BL 8 inch Howitzer Mk VI - VIII
Could you give a link to the article which is the correct Vickers 8-inch howitzer please.
 * Hi, The Japanese gun in your photo is not a howitzer, it's far too long and wrong shape. And the 8-inch howitzer was only developed in 1915. I think the Japanese gun in your photo is one of the 8-inch naval guns Japan bought from Armstrongs round about 1900 or one of the later copies that were bult in Japan. I don't think there is an article for that gun yet. regards, Rod. Rcbutcher (talk) 11:09, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for clearing that up anyway. Wolcott (talk) 16:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Play-off goals and appearences
Just to let you know mate. Play-off goals and appearances don't count as part of the domestic league season and shouldn't be added to players infoboxes. Just noticed you added them to a couple of players' infoboxes. --MIR17 (talk) 15:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * My mistake. Wolcott (talk) 15:06, 13 May 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) 18:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Civility - reply
Hi there WOLCOTT, VASCO from Portugal here,

Sorry for my very poor manners in the Miguel Vítor page, went way out of line, given you are a well-intended user, such as myself (believe it or not). Yes you are correct - and i am not being sarcastic, "truest" of truths - i do have some serious anger management problems that need to be addressed. In all fairness, however, i was not insulting or similar in the summary "at hand", merely hysterical.

Again, sorry for any incovenience, keep up the good work - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 15:18, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I see that i deserve no reply, even after apologizing for my behaviour. Was only hoping to provide a bridge for understanding, obviously you don't have the slightest intention of crossing it. OK, no problem, my conscience is clear, won't bother you anymore, i would like to receive the same courteous treatment from you. - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for adding that great photo to the Bombing of Singapore (1944–1945) - it adds a lot to the article. Cheers, Nick-D (talk) 07:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thank you too for acknowledging it. Wolcott (talk) 07:15, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Hamlyn Guide to Aircraft Markings
Please don't keep adding this source to numerous articles. The book is not an authoritative or well-known source. FWiW, your additions also require extensive rewriting. 16:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC).

JN Green
I was involved in the extensive research and eventual construction of the "Blayd Zero" as I was working on a film regarding the story of the Mitsubishi Zero. Our historical consultant had done extensive background research including using actual Zero components that provided the precise paint chips eventually used in the painting scheme of the aircraft. The colour originally is a faint grey-green which through oxidation rapidly deteriorated into what was commonly misinterpreted in contemporary photographs as either a white, light grey or even bare metal colour. I will make a subtle change in the caption for the Pearl Harbour film article to reflect the actual paint scheme was not accurate. What is more galling is that the producers knew that the aircraft were inaccurately portrayed as to colours, types and use in the attack but chose to have a distinctive scheme so that audiences would easily identify the "bad hats." They also wanted to pit the Curtiss P-40 against the Mitsubishi Zero in dog-fights?! Incredible, n'est pas? Bzuk (talk) 17:55, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

consolidation/rationalization of Korean conflict pages
Hi, can you please give me your thoughts on this proposal for the consolidation/rationalization of the various Korean conflicts pages: Division of Korea is renamed Korean Conflict or something similar, but all incidents and incursions are removed and placed in one of the following: Otherwise all the various specific incident pages would be unchanged other than being stated to be part of the Korean Conflict and the relevant incident category, but not Korean War. regards Mztourist (talk) 14:26, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Crab Wars is renamed Korean maritime border incidents and all the incidents listed on the Northern Limit Line page are moved there
 * List of border incidents involving North Korea is changed to Korean DMZ incidents and all Korean Demilitarized Zone incidents are moved there
 * a page created of other North-South incidents (espionage, submarines, terrorist bombings etc)

Happy 10th Anniversary of Wikipedia!
 Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia! Hey Bzuk  (contribs) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. Bzuk (talk) 15:41, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

The Swoose
I saw your note at Ken Keisel's user page. He's been indef blocked for copyright violations and so won't be responding. He did seem from time to time to add unsourced material, based on his personal knowledge, and my suggestion would be that if you've found something questionable you should revert it to a form that seems more in keeping with WP policies. His Talk page archive is pretty instructive if you want any more background on any of this. I hope this is helpful. JohnInDC (talk) 11:54, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Brewster F2A Buffalo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Muar (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) 11:09, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Brewster Buffalo.JPG
Thank you for uploading File:Brewster Buffalo.JPG.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the image description page states the source and copyright status of the derivative work, it only names the creator of the original work without specifying the status of their copyright over the work.

Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the original image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Kelly hi! 20:55, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4
Hi. When you recently edited Bunsen Honeydew, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Beaker (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) 15:31, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:MARINE~1.png


A tag has been placed on File:MARINE~1.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Because the images is controlled by Getty Images, its deletion is required by WP:NFC #7. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 14:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Battle off Endau - overquoting?
Your recent edits to the Battle off Endau article have introduced an awful lot of quotations in cites - I think that the level of quoting is approaching excessive levels. Are all these quotes really needed and do they risk getting into copyvio territory?Nigel Ish (talk) 16:28, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I notice that you have toned down the quoting, which is probably a good idea. I did raise the issue with User:Moonriddengirl and got this response - which suggests that caution is needed in using extensive quotes.Nigel Ish (talk) 10:03, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:CC Terrorist.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CC Terrorist.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 29
Hi. When you recently edited Char B1, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Distinguished Service Cross (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) 16:23, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Malayan Campaign
Please look back at this page, a new user added mentions of Thai involvement, similar to a banned user. ༆ (talk) 07:57, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Season's tidings!
To you and yours, Have a Merry ______ (fill in the blank) and Happy New Year! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 01:01, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Max Gradel.png
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Max Gradel.png, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 05:55, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

East Midlands derby
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:East_Midlands_derby

Hi, just wanted to get a more experienced member's attention to the talk on this page. Many feel that merging with the existing Derby County F.C. - Leicester City F.C. rivalry and Leicester City F.C. - Nottingham Forest F.C. rivalry pages would be appropriate and keep in line with the protocol for other derby articles featuring more than two clubs; Devon, South London etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisrwhiting (talk • contribs) 18:06, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Mask of Speed.PNG
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mask of Speed.PNG, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Powers T 02:33, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Mitsubishi A6M Zero operators, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malaya (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) 09:15, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Copyright query you placed on 488 Squadron's page
Duplicate of Q&A here - Found a picture

I've found a picture showing several pilots of 488 Squadron. But the website has a copyright note beneath it's webpage, so I assume the image is copyrighted. Is there a way to can get it here on Wikipedia? Here's the picture: No. 488 Fighter Squadron pilots at Singapore, December 1941. Wolcott (talk) 12:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Posible help here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Uploading_images
 * and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:File_copyright_tags
 * Worth checking the Imperial War Museum (London) catalogue; if the original was an official photo then it may now be out of copyright. Ask Geoffrey Spender , who might be interested to note the URL if it isn't already in his collection.
 * 255 Historian (talk) 17:44, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Medal-blanking IP editor
I see you've reverted a number of edits by an IP editor (60.246.x.x) who removes medals from gymnastics articles. I had a look at that IP's history, and I got a strong impression that the IP is a good faith contributor, though his complete failure to communicate or use edit summaries is problematic. All medal blankings by the IP I looked at fell into one of two categories: 1) medals that clearly should be removed (never happened, were wrongly marked, were annulled later etc.) or 2) "medals" from minor competitions the IP doesn't think are worth having in the infobox. (I will not judge whether the IP is right on point 2 – I'll leave that for gymnastics experts – but I can see the IP's point, and long-term gymnastics editor User:ThiagoSimoes has done very similar removals.) In short, in most cases the IP's edits are good and shouldn't be reverted without a deeper look. Sideways713 (talk) 13:33, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * We had a very extensive discussion about which medals should be added or removed from the articles on the Project Gymnastics Talk Page. I've tried to clean up as many articles in Artistic Gymnastics as I can, but there's a long work to be done on Rhythmics articles. Someone added World Cup Final medals from 2009 to 2015, but the last World Cup Final was in 2008. From 2009 to 2015 we merely had a final stage, not a proper World Cup Final. ThiagoSimoes (talk) 17:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input. I can see the discussion, but I'm not sure what the eventual consensus was – can you tell us if the IP editor was right or wrong to remove the following medals from artistic gymnastics infoboxes? 1. Gold at Artistic Gymnastics World Cup Ghent 2011 (the page was semi-protected to prevent the IP from removing this medal again) 2. European Junior Championships medals  3. Gold at the 2012 Gymnastics Olympic Test Event (and more Artistic Gymnastics World Cup medals)  4. U.S. National Championships medals  Thanks. Sideways713 (talk) 18:37, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, all of these medals should be removed from the infoboxes. 1. Medals from World Cup stages are not added to the articles, only medals earned in the World Cup Finals, which were staged until 2008. 2. Medals won during junior years are only valid if they were earned during the Youth Olympic Games or medals earned specifically in a team competition where junior and senior gymnasts are part of the team (especially the Pacific Rim Championships). 3. The Test Event is an event with restricted participation, so it counts as an invitational meet, and medals earned in invitational meets are not added to the infobox. 4. Medals won in national competitions should not be added to the infobox. ThiagoSimoes (talk) 18:49, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I've been reverting this IP editor since London 2012. When my requests for the affected articles be protected was approved, he created multiple accounts which I also requested be blocked for sock puppetry (Shushunova and Usarusrou are a couple of examples). His only explanation in the edit summary back then was that the World Cup is not important, but since other wiki users were reverting his blankings, arguing otherwise, I simply did the same. The fact that he failed to discuss this with other users on a consensus led me to believe that he was not adhering to a neutral point of view. His edits may be in good faith, but after I had all of his sock puppets blocked he has resorted to editing from the safety of an IP address. But I'm glad a consensus has finally been agreed upon and I can now cease my reverts. Thanks for clearing this up. Wolcott (talk) 03:34, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Gal1-pix95.gif


The file File:Gal1-pix95.gif has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Noel Sharp for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Noel Sharp 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/Noel Sharp until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lettlerhello • contribs 17:51, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Jack Hobbs (footballer) GA Reassessment
Jack Hobbs (footballer), an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --Whiteguru (talk) 12:30, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)