User talk:ViperSnake151/archive4

3989:

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

2959:

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.

3138:"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. 7888:. 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 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 Knowledge 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 Knowledge a better place. - 753:"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." 2450: 2101: 2469: 5402: 4374: 4325: 3842: 3659: 3614: 3569: 3321: 3268: 2027: 807:

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 Knowledge Commons. The Knowledge Commons seems to redirect to Knowledge versions now. Please double check. Thanks. --

6331: 7141: 2643: 6252: 7255: 7009: 6953: 5540: 5340: 5270: 4546: 3949: 668: 5831: 3895: 4452: 1867: 1640: 1579: 1518: 1048: 6590: 6478: 513: 7080:

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....

2861: 7312: 5972: 7536: 6853: 6759: 6712: 6381: 6105: 4598: 2277: 900: 3016: 220:

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.

5982: 5977: 4708: 5305: 5135: 5959: 3993:. 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. 5113:

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. --

4874:

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!

1171:")? 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.) - 6144:

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.

7204: 5061:

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

4939:

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

4301:

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

4097:

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 Knowledge's copyright policies.

3999:

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

2945:

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 Knowledge. The fact that German Knowledge thrives while excluding unfree content, proves that unfree images are not essential. Part of the difficulty is that the terms of use

2590:

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

1120:

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?

6443:

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 Knowledge's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page

6340:

project. The VPC project is suffering from a chronic lack of participation to the point that the project is at an impasse. A discussion is currently taking place about the future of this project and how to revitalize the project and participation. If you're interested in this project or have an idea

5112:

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

4987:

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

4677:

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

4427:

The photograph is copyrighted, and cannot be used without the expressed permission of Beate and Serge Klarsfeld. It is used by Knowledge for educational purposes only, to illustrate the subject of a biographical article on Beate and Serge Klarsfeld, with the permission of Beate Klarsfeld. Permission

4079:

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,

3539:

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

3161:

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

3086:

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

2785:

Hello, I wish to tell you about the recent developments in regards to the use Zimbabwean banknotes on Knowledge. 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

958:

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 Knowledge's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that

219:

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

4156:

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.

4116:

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

3360:

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'

2958:

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

806:

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 . I am "not obsessed with ridding Knowledge

730:

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

7359:

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

7079:

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

4873:

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

4278:

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

2664:. All the best for the new year, both towards you and your family and friends too. I know that I am the only person lonely enough to be running this thing as the new year is ushered in, but meh, what are you going to do. I like to keep my templated messages in a satisfactorily melancholy tone. ;) 1244:

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

1014:

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

4842:

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

3988:

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

102:

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

31:

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

7370:

3200:

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

1496:

I know this is the most delayed response ever, but i rarely log onto my account 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

757:

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

6143:

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"

2519:, and here's also hoping that all your family and friends are well. Lets all hope that the year coming will be a good one! If we've had disputes in the past, I hold no grudges, especially at such a time as this. If you don't know I am, I apologise, feel free to remove this from your page. 5195:

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.

4098:

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.

3248:

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

779:

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 Knowledge of it and all similar images, see

1269:

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.

5142:). 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.' Thank you. 2923:- 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. 5581:. 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) 3985:— 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. 1946: 68:

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

4080:

I am fully aware that Knowledge'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

4045:

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

3373:, 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 ^_-. 4000:

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! --

6164:

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

992:

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?

7281:

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.

7035:

6979:

6075: 6067: 6059: 6053: 3046: 3035: 3027: 3009: 2425:

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.

683:

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

1220:

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

5576:

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

293:. 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 Knowledge, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator. 2759:

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.

32:

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.

4964:. 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. 2946:

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

4988:

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?

2064:. 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. 855:

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.

5357:

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

2718:. I am sure I am but a voice of many when I say I trust the aforementioned users to improve the committee, each in their own way, as listed within their respective election statements. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to update the 7702: 3425:

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.

4621:

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.

3484:. 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!-- 4223:

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

3956:, 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. Thank you. 3399:

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.

7698: 6051: 1003:

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. -

103:

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. Thanks

2292: 48:

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!

5995:

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

5095:

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.

6395:, 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 4724: 4516: 7118:(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 3007: 7059:

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.

7285:

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.

7039:

6983:

2253:

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.

246:

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

7489: 3201:

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.

5080:

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.

2980: 2755: 2487: 2047: 914:, 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 344:, 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 120:

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.

7372: 6445: 5192: 960: 6087: 4533: 2882:

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!

1026:

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

7506: 6433:(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 4421:

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.

2988: 3520:

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. --

795: 4072:

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.

2984: 7122:

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"!?

1971: 1457: 2591:

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.

844:

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

5619:

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.

7456: 1421: 3072: 6896: 4641:

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."

2619:? The article did not conform to Knowledge'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. 7518: 7348:) 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 5240: 2485: 1953: 7523: 3990: 1141:

We do not have legitimate and explicit proof that California government works are in the public domain. It redirects to No license on Knowledge, and directly to Copyvio on Commons. See

7468: 7114:

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

6822:

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

1767: 7539: 7528: 4583: 5893: 4549: 4538: 2420:

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

2271: 1413: 1405: 4484:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 3741:

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!

2086: 1899:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 1672:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 1611:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 1550:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 1080:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any 3982: 2544:

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.

1388: 1217: 394:

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 okay

4512: 2521:

Come and say hi, I won't bite, I swear! It could even be good for me, you know - I'm feeling a little down at the moment with all of these snowmen giving me the cold shoulder :(

1731: 4480:

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 "

1895:

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 "

1668:

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 "

1607:

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 "

1546:

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 "

1076:

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 "

7439: 7278: 5257: 5232: 4157:

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.

3967: 1790: 1784: 6078:

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. --

1940: 5908: 5672:

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.

5452: 5273: 5262: 4718: 282: 7555: 5757: 341: 3776: 3059:

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

1817: 1810: 331: 7484: 5567: 5293: 2486: 4612: 4416: 3450: 2813: 1860: 1121:

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 the

428: 3977:

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

3963:

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.

7451: 7422: 6872: 6840: 2295:. 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. 1872: 1723: 1715: 1467: 830: 816: 204:, 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. -- 7690: 6729:. 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. 6122:. 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. 5888: 5594: 5527: 4440: 3116:

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. --

2129: 1403: 4984: 7462: 6130: 5495: 4117:

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.

2308: 984: 6778: 6281:, 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 5821: 5562: 1988: 1809: 6699: 5252: 3049:, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at 2715: 2173:

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

1287: 1280: 1041: 6092: 5481: 2913: 1916: 1782: 1777: 1352: 1053: 1028: 7168:

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 Knowledge (see

6746: 5487: 4473:

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 Knowledge (see

3220: 3162:

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

1888:

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 Knowledge (see

1661:

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 Knowledge (see

1600:

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 Knowledge (see

1539:

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 Knowledge (see

1069:

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 Knowledge (see

7578: 7164:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 7049: 6741: 4469:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 2811:

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

1884:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 1657:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 1596:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 1535:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 1506: 1065:, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. 821:

Well, I see that there are still duplicate files in Knowledge Commons accessible via link. A category indicating that needs to be entered in image page? --

527:, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Knowledge's 7152: 6762: 6751: 4949: 4746: 3191: 3139: 1804: 1491: 1097: 1008: 6993: 5939: 5924: 5815: 5610: 4141: 3757:

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

2407: 180: 5486:

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?--

4973: 1842:

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. -

1633: 1511: 1430: 1425: 145:

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.

7793: 7574: 7543: 7239: 5771: 1107: 154: 7619: 7133: 7123: 6638: 6526: 6435: 1713: 1689: 1645: 1567: 1523: 1486: 1434: 1180: 1149: 484: 7769: 6461: 5105: 5090: 5071: 5056: 4689: 3728: 1398: 1113:

This file is in the public domain, because It is the work of a California government agency as noted below and is free of the exceptions specified at

558:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the

7431: 6369: 5623: 5415: 4954: 4387: 4338: 3855: 3672: 3627: 3582: 3334: 3281: 3182: 2190: 2160: 2040: 1344: 1336: 950: 767: 740: 258: 7789: 7466:, 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 4501: 2553: 2263: 2248: 1628: 213: 7388: 7295: 7244: 6342: 6240: 4553: 4457: 4445: 4030:

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.

2205: 1572: 1417: 79: 7765: 6812: 4528: 5514: 4932: 4785: 2838: 2128:, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the 1584: 845: 7874: 7821: 7732: 7679: 5179: 4134:

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. -

4105: 3879: 3060: 1794: 231: 6998: 6860: 5644: 5277: 4631: 2991: 2761: 637:

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.

237: 135: 112: 7608: 5547: 5207: 4961: 4923: 4489: 4194: 3439: 3415: 1904: 1677: 1616: 1555: 1085: 6718: 6704: 6691: 6597: 6583: 6573: 6485: 6471: 6429: 6388: 6374: 5148:

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

1472: 476: 192: 7649: 5122: 4279:

welcome to have another go but I think I've covered all the facts and sourced my refernces without being sensationalst. Best wishes, Mark--

3830: 3309: 2827: 1699:

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,

1497:

performed on a computer i failed to log out on either way i apologise for the error on my part and the significant delay in addressing it.

979: 790: 7300: 6942: 6111: 6097: 4797: 4481: 4020: 3257: 3163: 1896: 1740: 1735: 1669: 1608: 1547: 1077: 944: 907: 893: 6766: 5600:

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.

2216:

The theme overflows from the MacOS default, though, and is thus copyrighted by Apple. Either way, it is not required to show the browser.

7400:

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.

6726: 6211: 5795: 5656: 5476: 2539: 1744: 722: 384: 200:

Just FYI— You were reverted over there on the basis that your edit changed the meaning without discussion. However, the text you removed

7844: 7645: 6154: 5233: 4650: 2347:

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

1297:

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

1238: 1035: 1019: 727:"ViperSnake151 (Talk | contribs | block) m (8,155 bytes) (Reverted good faith edits by WhisperToMe; No source. w/TW) (rollback | undo)" 7826: 7737: 7684: 7631: 6578: 6316: 6119: 4698: 3918:, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the 3389: 3152: 403: 4055: 2841:. 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 2231:

I disagree. If, hypothetically, there was an image of the album artwork and the caption "The album sold well in stores" in an article

1329: 7854: 7753: 7712: 7659: 7588: 7267: 7032: 7021: 6976: 6965: 6783: 6206: 6180: 4955: 4506: 3713: 3235: 3106: 2925: 1966: 1727: 1334: 435:, the project's maintainer. GTK+ isn't a language; please make sure to double-check technical content changes in the future. Thanks. 7840: 6835: 4288: 3125: 865: 7560: 6466: 4989: 3394: 3136: 1935: 58: 7089: 4128: 3848: 3841: 2854: 2091: 7498: 4933: 4779: 3795: 3496: 2968: 2531: 2284: 2174: 2165: 7069: 5668:

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. :)

4998: 3936: 3529: 2735: 2334: 126:

Your GOOD FAITH contribution to the Gurgaon article has been reverted please discuss changes on the Duisscusion page. Thank You

7376: 7301: 6794: 6665: 6553: 6449: 6370: 5854:, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page 5849: 5703: 5682: 5569: 5161: 4908: 4428:

granted by email from Beate Klarsfeld to Joyson Noel on June 30, 2008: "You can use the photo. Best regards, Beate Klarsfeld."

4313: 4173: 3147: 2907: 563: 443: 7847:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 7705:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 7652:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 7581:). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 5985: 3966: 3719:

Please comment as requested on the GA review page. There are several other Tagalog references that need translation. Thanks.

1999: 7850: 7749: 7746:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 7708: 7655: 7584: 5870:

if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the

5185: 3223:. Software isn't eligible for speedy deletion under A7, so I declined the speedy. Feel free to prod or take to AfD. Cheers!-- 2929: 1439: 1134: 985: 891: 5062:

is a content fork, and a POV content fork. I can go on, but you are breaching many, many guidelines and policies right now.

5019: 5008:

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

2772: 2750: 2628: 2435: 2225: 7081: 7061: 6222:

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

4591: 3470: 3209: 2777: 2371: 2033: 2026: 614:

I am well aware of the law. You should know however that the copyright for the main Louvre architecture ran out years ago.

300:, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on 201: 97: 7897: 6219:

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

4827: 4763: 4671: 3096: 2605: 2576: 1259: 886: 717: 7473: 5756:

for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at

5631: 5032:. You had to know before you submitted this page that this would never meet our standards for notability or reliability. 4889: 4866: 4411: 4362: 4228:). The current version is a little less eye-catching and looks a little more like it would be a routine system message. 4178: 3867: 3692: 3647: 3602: 2400: 2364: 1976: 1766:

for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at

1456:

for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at

1387:

for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at

1361: 1356: 1210: 301: 91: 5837: 4246: 3752: 1451: 277: 7524: 7491: 7424: 6841: 6747: 5636:

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

5528: 5522: 5145: 5047:

99% of that coverage is from unreliable blogs, the rest is duplication of the same four facts. That is not notability.

5029: 4773: 4091: 3327: 3320: 3101: 1958: 1365: 1274: 365: 297: 289: 7156:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 5445:

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

3557: 3002: 1749: 7104: 6784: 6044: 6016: 5506: 5227: 5041: 4642: 4577: 4084:, I have restored the link, and I would ask that you not remove it again without consensus support to do so. Thanks, 3901: 3800: 3544:

use to be an NBC station and made a similar move in 1987 where NBC purchased a station here. 20 years later we have

3355: 3350: 3261: 6937: 5805:) so the article is presentable enough now. We still need to get cracking at filling in the skeleton on my sandbox. 5435: 5395: 5333: 2616: 2196:

I have removed the SD template. The appropriate way to nominate this image for deletion is through a regular IFD. __

499: 464: 5730: 5725: 5258: 4978: 4823: 4714: 4534: 3420: 3288: 2020: 1348: 772: 528: 2053: 1708: 474:

You win. I am leaving Knowledge. I am not sure why you wanted me gone so badly, but you can be happy I am gone. --

7417: 6917: 6700: 6669: 6557: 6159: 6093: 5734: 4466: 3366: 2801:

reads: "the term of such copyright shall be the period from the date on which such bank notes or coin are issued

2008: 1962: 1761: 835: 656: 567: 532: 87: 696:. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a 7618:

The citation lines were poorly formated and really didn't work or had much use from my point of view at least.

6364: 6246: 6187: 6083: 5461:

The request got lost somewhere on RFPP, but I've unprotected it after talking to the original protecting admin

5448: 5363: 4862: 4636: 4461:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 4403: 4354: 4273: 4039: 3688: 3643: 3598: 3109: 2790:

An image of a banknote which has been demonetized in terms of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Act Chapter 22:10 or

1876:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 1649:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 1588:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 1527:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 1057:. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 316: 7169: 4474: 1889: 1662: 1601: 1540: 1447: 1070: 1000: 6040: 6012: 5776: 5766: 5717: 5652: 4767: 2478: 2076: 1370: 1279: 1204: 646: 370: 4519:. With your input and agreement to work through mediation, it is hoped we can achieve a lasting solution. -- 2939: 918:, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please 7321: 6913: 6725:. I do not think that this article satisfies Knowledge's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at 6118:. I do not think that this article satisfies Knowledge's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at 6066:. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at 5782: 4265: 4241: 2934: 2912: 2642: 2313: 2291:. I do not think that this article satisfies Knowledge's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at 701: 492: 389: 5739: 5669: 3973:

Hi. I looked at all the article pages where the infobox was used, and I agree with your interpretation of

2060:. I for one don't care if the article is blocked, but I do care if Knowledge or its editors get sued for 1443: 596:

Could you explain your rationales to me? The 'no freedom of panorama in France' doesn't make sense to me.

6657: 6601: 6579: 6545: 6489: 6467: 6408: 6297: 5884: 5861: 5785:

containing a strong lead and a skeleton for the body of the article that we can work on to get it ready.

5359: 5354: 3885: 3810: 3697: 3214: 2845:

much, much easier, because the wiki-ware records such large, summaryless edits as "high risk". Thanks. --

2155: 2100: 745:

There are times when it is perfectly reasonable to only use first party content to source claims. As per

685: 680: 520: 420: 1382: 6661: 6549: 6404: 6266:

on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a

6225:

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

6150: 5966: 5956:(This appears to be English Knowledge's first article created in the year 2010). Saludos, cordialmente 5871: 5857: 4207: 3919: 3031: 2183: 2177:

should not be done this way, and anyway that page is at AfD currently. I suggest removing the CSD tag.

1757: 997: 923: 345: 311: 194: 2891:}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ 504: 7271: 7045: 7025: 6989: 6969: 6928:

Please do not remove huge part of an article like you just did without discussing it first. Thanks.--

6817: 6722: 6301: 6267: 6135: 6115: 6079: 5751: 5693: 5381: 4894: 4660:

Why did you nominate this article when you haven't worked on it a bit? You need to explain yourself.

4608: 3501: 3435: 3294: 2288: 2080: 781: 691: 536: 327: 6307:

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

3158: 7743: 7447: 7328: 7085: 7065: 6868: 6774: 5762: 5491: 5128: 4611:. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at 3806: 2707: 2440: 2431: 1921: 1753: 1298: 800: 617: 599: 577: 54: 6068:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (Human Readable Version)

5167: 3038:

has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (

551:

notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on

6856: 6845: 6274: 5937: 5922: 5906: 5813: 5793: 5680: 5608: 5592: 5423: 5287: 5138:

Please remember to mark your edits as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see

4945: 4737: 4139: 4126: 3548:

our NBC O&O in the last place being everything. Meanwhile, WSVN is on top of the market. --

3475: 3305: 3143: 2850: 2633: 2624: 2393: 2382: 2357: 1015:

really know for sure would be to get a recorded copy of it with time codes. Too much effort :) -

994: 796: 773: 380: 17: 3369:

and not 'Sta' which is the sounding-out of the Kanji in that game's title (And Oha is simply an

1122: 1114: 6831: 6414:

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding

6282: 5880: 5578: 5543: 5532: 5471: 4627: 4311: 4192: 4163: 4111: 3953: 3817: 3785: 3770: 3379: 3176: 2832: 2798: 2744: 2167: 2139: 2123: 2057: 1931: 1850: 1828: 1142: 929:

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding

881: 399: 273: 176: 150: 131: 108: 43: 5830: 3894: 3779:

and tell me if it's better/worse than the current layout? Specifically the Main series group.

1969:. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at 1378: 455:

Hi, could you fix your AfD nomination for InkBall? There's no AfD tag on the article. Cheers,

171:

The photographer of the image, Gurinder Osan's picture are avilable on many sites on the web.

7893: 7624: 7127: 7074: 6145: 5962: 5842: 5101: 5086: 5067: 5052: 5037: 5003: 4687: 4669: 4646: 4436: 3906: 3724: 3709: 3553: 3491: 3230: 3187: 3113: 2778: 2178: 1482: 763: 736: 440: 408: 5509:

has become more wikipedic since last year. Perhaps it could now be flagged "humor" and the

5440: 3157:

Hey. I was just wondering, why have you removed a huge chunk of information and images from

1193:

Do I understand correctly that the OTRS ticket 2008091610055854 applies to *categories*? --

7551: 7514: 7353: 7185:, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a 7041: 6985: 6808: 6400: 6312: 6028: 6000: 5747: 5640: 5559: 5431: 5408: 5401: 5391: 5329: 5203: 4850: 4819: 4811: 4524: 4407: 4358: 4293: 4147: 4081: 3444: 3427: 3077: 3068: 2903: 2871: 2601: 2572: 2549: 2116: 1264: 1176: 1130: 1102: 919: 731:

website itself is notable, so anything on it may be described in the entry about the site.

323: 75: 37: 1374: 8: 7566: 7443: 7054: 6864: 6770: 6673: 6649: 6626: 6561: 6537: 6514: 6278: 6263: 6236: 5663: 5367: 4969: 4199: 4153: 4013: 3698: 3130: 3057:

if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that

2823: 2699: 2427: 2293:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Internet Watch Foundation and Knowledge (2nd nomination)

2211: 2014: 1771: 1502: 1461: 1392: 1188: 826: 812: 697: 661: 571: 544: 83: 50: 4940:

a discussion at GA to take over from Arsenikk and complete the review process. Regards.

7384: 7344:, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, 5931: 5916: 5900: 5867: 5807: 5787: 5743: 5674: 5620: 5602: 5586: 5518: 5350: 5345: 5309: 5282: 5175: 5157: 5015: 4941: 4885: 4858: 4834: 4759: 4399: 4380: 4373: 4367: 4350: 4331: 4324: 4318: 4166: 4135: 4122: 4102: 4088: 3874: 3862: 3835: 3788: 3764: 3748: 3684: 3665: 3658: 3652: 3639: 3620: 3613: 3607: 3594: 3575: 3568: 3562: 3525: 3464: 3382: 3301: 2879: 2846: 2661: 2620: 2386: 2350: 1984: 1839: 1820:

page again. We are no longer allowed to use Nielsen information per an OTRS ticket. -

1477:

I understand it isn't mine, but I do use it and it hasn't even cost me a single penny.

1291: 1250: 1146: 974: 852: 787: 711: 672: 376: 252: 225: 209: 7349: 6396: 2449: 1290:, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under the 915: 7870: 7861:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

7817: 7808:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

7785: 7728: 7719:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

7675: 7666:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

7604: 7595:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

7235: 7222: 6901: 6827: 6634: 6522: 6407:. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the 6198: 6172: 6036: 6008: 5721: 5648: 5466: 5321: 5313: 5223: 4919: 4904: 4802: 4623: 4304: 4284: 4185: 4160: 4074:

Each such link must be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis.

4067: 3782: 3734: 3510: 3410: 3376: 3206: 3168: 3092: 3045:

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting

2695: 2558: 2072: 2061: 1927: 1844: 1822: 1222: 1200: 948:(just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 876: 649: 395: 361: 336: 269: 172: 146: 127: 104: 63: 7196:

I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.

6615: 6503: 5513:

dropped altogether, or put in any appropriate sub-section (i.e. WinXP), if need be.

4515:, you have been included in a request for formal mediation regarding the subject at 7889: 7879: 7761: 7161: 6933: 6909: 6737: 6569: 6457: 5500: 5149: 5097: 5082: 5063: 5048: 5033: 4679: 4661: 4655: 4560: 4432: 4061: 3932: 3720: 3705: 3549: 3485: 3346: 3314: 3274: 3267: 3240: 3224: 2974: 2964: 2711: 2610: 1881: 1801: 1704: 1654: 1593: 1532: 1478: 1062: 861: 848:. Kudos for the image-copyright work especially, I have always dreaded that area. 759: 732: 460: 436: 7109: 1319:. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 7547: 7542:

has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at

7510: 7218: 7188: 6923: 6886: 6859:

has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at

6804: 6765:

has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at

6614:

While all contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be

6502:

While all contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be

6419: 6358: 6308: 5990: 5947: 5802: 5551: 5546:

has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at

5510: 5427: 5387: 5325: 5308:

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Knowledge, as you did to

5276:

has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at

5213: 5199: 5139: 4815: 4793: 4552:

has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at

4520: 4497: 3481: 3064: 3054: 3023: 2899: 2888: 2867: 2728: 2679: 2597: 2568: 2545: 2526: 2413: 2339: 2327: 2258: 2243: 2220: 1912: 1793:

has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at

1685: 1624: 1563: 1307: 1172: 1126: 1093: 934: 870: 638: 469: 448: 33: 7341: 7340:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under

6392: 6391:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under

3039: 911: 910:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under

7641: 7410: 7393: 7291: 7165: 7140: 7116:

NBC's opening from the 1994 Major League Baseball All-Star Game from Pittsburgh

7094: 6296:, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see 6289: 6232: 6137: 5697: 5462: 5317: 5248: 4965: 4470: 4001: 3974: 3540:

not air Leno. Remember NBC made this mistake once here where I live. Our own

2892: 2819: 2671: 2495: 2378: 2201: 2002: 1885: 1658: 1597: 1536: 1498: 1316: 1066: 822: 808: 784: 652: 559: 552: 7613: 7115: 4302:

did not meet any of those criterion, so I feel the deletion was appropriate. –

4220:. I don't have a problem with it per se, I'm just wondering why it was done. 26: 7800: 7776: 7380: 7262: 7246: 7182: 7100: 6797:

giving the problems leading to you adding the contradict tag to the article.

6644:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

6532:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

6337: 6293: 6277:

to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only

6071: 6063: 5193:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/National Portrait Gallery copyright conflicts

5171: 5153: 5011: 4881: 4854: 4395: 4346: 4298: 4118: 4099: 4085: 4051: 4035: 4025: 3760: 3744: 3680: 3635: 3590: 3521: 3517: 3456: 3121: 3050: 2920: 2687: 2675: 2564: 2303: 2297: 1980: 1694: 1247: 1031:-- so I guess they scheduled it for 8:08PM and actually started it at 8PM. - 964: 707: 432: 263: 248: 221: 205: 7866: 7862: 7813: 7809: 7724: 7720: 7671: 7667: 7600: 7596: 7231: 7157: 6877: 6193: 6167: 6032: 6004: 5713: 5705: 5375: 5371: 5219: 4915: 4900: 4462: 4280: 3996: 3534: 3401: 3370: 3202: 3088: 2842: 2065: 1877: 1650: 1589: 1528: 1195: 1058: 746: 643: 357: 5370:

among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek

3034:

from Knowledge. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because

352:. Please don't revert again. "Jerusalem front-end loader attack" is wrong 7694: 7637: 7362: 7320:

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

6929: 6905: 6800:

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

6733: 6565: 6453: 6336:

You are being contacted because you have in the past participated in the

6321: 5298: 5118: 5024: 4254: 4230: 4214: 4200: 3978: 3928: 3913: 3449:

Hey I know you meant well, but that pic wasn't even up for discussion at

3342: 3250: 2960: 2955: 2951: 2703: 2691: 2683: 1993: 1798: 1700: 1231: 857: 632: 456: 5929:

Alright, I've added the lead, the infobox, and a skeleton for the body.

5539: 5339: 5269: 4545: 3948: 667: 7477: 6891: 6589: 6477: 6353: 5953: 4789: 4604: 4493: 2947: 2667: 2508: 2321: 2107: 1908: 1681: 1620: 1559: 1089: 512: 7742:

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to

6330: 6024:

Please check i am adding references and adding more info to the page

2793:

An image of a coin or the artistic work defining the design of a coin.

2239:, one wouldn't expect it to require an image of the album in a store. 2048:

re: album covers on articles that are not about the album or its cover

7832: 7402: 7287: 7099:

Replied on my page. Let's discuss over there, as we started there. -

7016: 7000: 6960: 6944: 6677: 6251: 5244: 4451: 4183:

Well, it was still only two re-creations under that specific title. –

3735: 2516: 2197: 1866: 1639: 1578: 1517: 1271: 1047: 1032: 1016: 1005: 524: 506: 5241:

Knowledge:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jack Merridew/Blood and Roses

4707: 4618:

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

2860: 7885: 7570: 6758: 6732:

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

6711: 6380: 6125:

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

6104: 4597: 4152:

Another source for capitalization standards is WikiProject Albums.

4047: 4031: 3117: 3015: 2276: 899: 676: 424: 409: 243: 6062:, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for 5801:

I've added a plot summary for the article (at a decent length per

5316:. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been 3254: 2803:

until such bank notes or coin are demonetized in terms of the said

7836: 6288:

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious

5971: 4843:

approve of it being here", then it should be fine, shouldn't it?

3082:

Hi, this is in regards to the removal of the TSN2 HD logo in the

1301:

wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template

449: 5976: 7394: 7337: 7305: 7203:

the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click

6076:

Knowledge:Criteria for speedy deletion (Human Readable Version)

6060:

Knowledge:Criteria for speedy deletion (Human Readable Version)

6054:

Knowledge:Criteria for speedy deletion (Human Readable Version)

5981: 5114: 4513:

Wikipedia_talk:Non-free_content/RFC_on_use_of_sports_team_logos

3047:

Category:Pages containing media that could be copied to Commons

3036:

Category:Pages containing media that could be copied to Commons

3028:

Category:Pages containing media that could be copied to Commons

3010:

Category:Pages containing media that could be copied to Commons

2875: 2567:

article. If you hate them so much put your opinions on a forum.

1226: 307:

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

7457:

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Kopimi images

7279:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Cliff Hangers (3rd nomination)

6074:

with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of

5362:. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to 5304: 5218:

I'd like to send you an email, but your email is not enabled.

5134: 7497:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

7430:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

7217:

If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off

3704:

OK, please explain that. The cited clause is ungrammatical.

268:

Ok I guess you are right. Sorry for the inconvenience caused.

7354:

see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

6439:

explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for

6401:

see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

5958: 5952:

Español: Hola amigo wikipedista podrias mejorar el articulo

5418: