User talk:Wwagner

Welcome!

Hello, Wwagner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Dr Debug (Talk) 18:15, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message on my talk page and for putting that entry up!

You asked: is it considered bad form to edit one's own entry? Actually, it is. However, I can point you to sources for filling out the bio or adding references.

• The Insider
• IMDb
• NPR
• HBO's Middle Sexes
• Lesbian Alliance interview
• Frontiers profile

It's also considered good form to put this notice at the top of that article's talk page if the person is a contributor: {{Notable Wikipedian|Jokestress}}

Glad to have you here! Happy editing! Jokestress 05:05, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had to undo part of your edit on the PEZ Wikipedia page. There is a Bozo the Clown dispenser...see Pezbase.

Beakerboy 17:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A watered-down version of the proposed policy against censorship is now open for voting. Will you kindly review the policy and make your opinions known? Thank you very much.Loom91 18:00, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I never said the pages were mine, but I did make clear that I didn't like some of your edits. If you make more edits to any of the pages, I'm not going to revert them unless they don't look right. You removed track information from one page and linked to an unnecessarily large page, when the track information originally on the page would have more than sufficed. I'm sorry if you took offence to any of this, it was not my intention. But be aware that if I don't like something, I always make it clear. I'll try to appear less ruthless in future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JD UK (talk • contribs)

So now linking to another article, large or otherwise, is a bad thing? I removed the information I added to Wipeout (video game) and instead linked to the "unnecessarily large" Wipeout teams article for two reasons: because the information I added was redundant and was discussed in much more complete detail in the linked-to article (of which I was not aware at the time I added the data), and also because the formatting of the information I added was poor. I noted both those reasons in my edit summary.

As for your complaint that I am always "changing the smallest things", yes, I often make small, incremental changes, and some of them are for aesthetic reasons, and I will make no apology for it. I made no secret that I thought the placement of the screenshot image in the Wipeout article made the article look poor, and also made the lead paragraph more difficult to see, and that I would try to find a better placement for the image. You, of course, reverted my change with no edit summary, and only the quoted complaint on the talk page (unsigned, as usual).

Another edit you reverted with no comment (the changes I made to Wipeout 3: Special Edition) were style-related, and not my style, Wikipedia's style. There is no need to have 5 links to the same article in the space of 7 lines; it's overlinking, plain and simple. See the linking style manual if you don't believe me.

Regardless, I will no longer be wasting my time with you, or the Wipeout articles. Again, good luck to you. — Wwagner 16:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Considering how many edits I've done that are summed up by "italicized album titles," and considering I did a mojor rewrite on The Machines, it amuses me that I missed those titles. Thanks for fixing it. :-) -Freekee 05:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 05:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you have any contributions to, er, contribute, to these articles, I want you to make them; assuming I'd be the person stopping you from doing that. --JD[^talk|_email] 21:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you reply to this message please, at least so that I know you've read it? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 21:18, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't have anything to add to those articles just now. I'll keep them in mind, though. — Wwagner 22:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for replying. And, sorry. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 22:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wwagner!
Sure no problems, it was the artist in me! I'll upload an edit as soon as I dig up the original. Thanks for your patience, --Fir0002 12:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about this? Image:Sour dough loaves03.jpg It's not identical, as I couldn't be bothered trying to get the same post processing. But it's close enough. If you want me to edit it to look more like the other one tell me, and I'll see what I can do. Anyway sorry again for your trouble. --Fir0002 12:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

W00t! That's awesome! I really appreciate your efforts, that image will be a perfect replacement for the zoomy one. Thanks a million! — Wwagner 14:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Wwagner. I notice you've been tagging images such as Image:GElogo.jpg with {{isd}} because they are redundant to an SVG version. However, CSD I1 clearly specifies that the two images must be in the same image file format, so for example a JPEG that is redundant to an SVG cannot be speedily deleted under CSD I1, and the {{isd}} tag is inapplicable. I would suggest following the Wikipedia image deletion procedure for such images. Alternatively, fair-use images (such as logos) that are no longer used in any articles can be tagged with {{subst:orfud}}, which makes them eligible for deletion in seven days. Please let me know if you have any questions. —Bkell (talk) 19:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I wasn't 100% sure I was doing that right in the first place; I guess I wasn't. I'll do as you ask with the others.

Here's one question: is there any general Wiki-wide file format preference? I noticed that Image:BBC Logo 1997-Present.svg was tagged as redundant to the png version, but in most other cases, the .svg image seem to be the preferred one. — Wwagner 19:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In general, SVG is preferred over any raster format (PNG, JPEG, GIF, etc.), because SVGs can be cleanly scaled to any size. But for this reason there is a dispute about whether SVG versions of logos can be considered fair use. There's a disagreement over what "low-resolution" means when applied to SVGs, and it is believed that logos should be low-resolution images to qualify for fair use. See Wikipedia talk:Logos#SVG.

As far as raster formats go, JPEG should be used only for photographs, paintings, and so on; PNG should be used for maps, flags, charts, diagrams, line drawings, screenshots of text, and other images that contain large blocks of a few solid colors; and GIF should be used only for animations. See Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload for more information. —Bkell (talk) 19:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, there's this tag that I always forget about, which is probably better than {{subst:orfud}} for these redundant logos: {{subst:or-fu-re|Image:BetterImage.ext}}. This tag has the same meaning as {{subst:orfud}}, but it also says that the image has been replaced by a better image. —Bkell (talk) 19:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Bkell, that's some very helpful info! And having looked at your user page, I agree with your statements that Image: space is a chaotic mess. I'll see if I can help you tame that chaos a little bit. :) — Wwagner 20:05, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you updating png->svg please choose appropriate svg for the userbox. 1 2 –Lowg 02:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To my eye, those images are close enough as to be identical. There's almost assuredly a political difference of which I'm not aware, but visually they're the same. — Wwagner 02:15, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: my userpage Thanks. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 23:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I didn't get one of those wrong on your world guide book page, Justin. I'm just working from images which are tagged as redundant. Image:Sweden flag large 1844.png was tagged, so in the course of replacing it, I also found the SVG which replaced Image:Norway flag large 1844.png and replaced them both at the same time. — Wwagner 23:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the friendly heads up about my images. I appreciate it. Also, if anything ever arises, feel free to constructively edit my pages. I do not mind as long as it was good faith. Thanks again! --WillMak050389 18:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't delt with through CSD since it floods the catigory and isn't critical.Geni 00:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, gotcha; figured it was something like that. Seeing that stuff just sitting around in Redundant Media annoys me, but I think I can handle it... :) — Wwagner 01:25, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wwagner, I noticed you deleted several images uploaded by User:Jason640 regarding the Bayport Fire Department. All of the images on the bottom of that page come from Bayport FD's website. I recommend that at your convenience you delete the photos on that page. Thanks! --Daysleeper47 17:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip. I was able to find one image s/he uploaded that was almost assuredly copyright violation (CV), which I nom'ed for deletion, but couldn't find any of the others on the Bayport FD site. Having said that, most of them have the same style and font, and are probably CV as well; I'll poke around a bit more, and see what I can find. — Wwagner 00:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On October 17, 2006, the bot corrected Song of the 144,000, "enflamed" --> "inflamed" - apparently the former is actually the right spelling, in that piece. I've put it back. Poets, makin' up words, go figure. :) — Wwagner 18:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tsk, bloody poets! :) Thanks for the heads up, I've made a note of it. Cheers, CmdrObot 19:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is your Gran Turismo (series) knowledge first-hand? Or are you just very good at learning about things from sources?--SportWagon 21:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most of it is first hand. I've played mostly GT and GT4, but I own and have played GT2 and GT3 as well. I've been getting pretty serious about sourcing statements in Wikipedia articles lately, just because of some of the unsupported nonsense that a lot of people add. The contributions to a lot of video game articles seem to be especially bad in that respect. Of course I just added an unsourced bit of trivia to the GT4 article this afternoon... :) — Wwagner 05:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the end of User:SportWagon it now contains what I nearly replied here. No sweat about the monkey, BTW, I still need to double check for it some time. (Remember, it's supposedly not there in time trials).--SportWagon 22:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I looked for every piece of trivia that GT4 had listed, in practice mode (which I guess is what people mean when they say "time trials"), and sure enough, the monkey is there. Looks like a blob of, uh, something sitting on the branch, but it's there alright, just before the second corner after the first tunnel. Now they just need to make the monkey move around in GT5, for maximum excessiveness. — Wwagner 23:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Gran Turismo 4. (Also a bit more about criticisms).--SportWagon 06:04, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hihi - Stareted nutting this out a bit and adding citations at my Sandbox so feel free to change stuff there. Cheers! Lauren^♫/∆ 03:23, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lauren! You've got a good start going; I've done quite a bit of work on it in my sandbox as well. I rearranged all the real-person entries together, and all the fictional-person entries together, and pared down most of the descriptions of each person to the essential things for which that person is known other than being trans, unless they were only known for their transness (such as Jorgensen or Araujo or the like). Some of the blurbs were just way too long, and IMO, unnecessarily duplicated much of what was already in the subject's article. I've also added all the birth and death dates that any of the wiki articles had. I tried to strip the fictional entries down a lot too, though I'm not 100% sure that those are really working the way I have them.

I've been adding cites for the past couple days - I'm trying to focus on either interviews in which the subject talks about their transness, or bios which come out and say "this person is transsomething". Some people, I just can't find much on, and some I can't find articles which have unambiguous statements about the subject, and some have just a bunch of blog entries about or by the subject, which I'm treating as not reliable sources. You've found some good sources, especially those dead-tree publications. Here's a question for you: do you think we need more than one source per entry? The more the merrier? I've been doing one per entry, just to get something there, and to keep the cite list from getting too long. We can always use the sources we find to improve the article of that subject as well.

Working together, we can probably knock this out in no time at all. You're more than welcome to edit my copy too, if you like. — Wwagner 05:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My attitude has been: One GOOD reference (reasonable source, preferrably the actual person talking about their status) in the list, and then cleaning up th article as I go. If there's more than one good reference, then they can go on the actual page.

Should we work on yours primarily? I figure, keep all the effort in one place. I'll put a watch on it. BTW, I like the cleaner layout.

Is there an alternative {{reflist}} template? Just wondering if we can have it collapsed unless someone particularly looks at the references.

I think it is important to put down what type of "transgender" the person is - If only because I'd like to make a sub-list of transsexual people. Would also help other lists (not that I nessicarily like the) such as list of transsexual actors and the like.

Thanks for listening to my 2c. Cheers! Lauren^♫/∆ 00:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wholeheartedly agree with your citation policy - one good one, and that's probably enough. And since this reflist is going to be ridiculously long, having it collapsible might be helpful. I'll toy with that a bit. I don't think there's a template, but I figured out the markup for the collapsible stuff.

We can certainly work mainly on my copy. If you'd like to include what the transperson's "type" is, feel free to do so. For some of them, the distinctions could be a little hazy, or could change at any time, which is one reason I kinda avoided including that kind of description. And another more vague reason, is that some people really, really want to get away from being known as trans, or that they were ever anything other than what they are now. I'm not sure that a public person can really live stealth like that, especially if they were notable before their transition as well, but I suppose it's their prerogative to try. It's not necessarily my prerogative (or desire) to pry. :)

Once we finish up with the real people, you're going to have to take the lead on the fictitious folks section. I made some changes and condensed it, but it seems awfully perfunctory now. There's surely a happy medium between too short and too long for the entries, but... <big shrug> — Wwagner 01:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm.... Okay - I think you've convinced me on the "typifying" people issue - but where they are particularly famous for being trans, I think it should stay, as you suggested earlier. People can always have a look at the article itself.

BTW, I am assuming we're leaving out redlinks at the moment?

As to fictional/etc., I'll have a think. I'm about to start putting some of my references into yours, and I'll start down at "Z" and work my way up.

Cheers! Lauren^♫/∆ 06:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WOOOT !!! 100 references! I'm done for tonight. Will keep going tommorrow, maybe. Cheers! Lauren^♫/∆ 08:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have done some more this A.M. (my time). Also created List of intersex people, so if you'd like to put people there that you find are in fact intersexed, that would be great. Intersex is apparently not covered by LGBT studies so I can't expect much help for it. Cheers! Lauren^♫/∆ 02:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Deindenting for readability) The refs look awesome! I think this is the most heavily referenced article I've ever seen on the wiki. W00t! I took a night off the referencing blowout, but I'll get back at it tomorrow. I guess we'll be onto the fictitious folks now, which might be a little more challenging.

One concern I have is the additions you've done to the peoples' descriptions; one of the things I was trying to do is pare the descriptions down to a minimal level. I've got a few reasons for what I was attempting.

1. This list has the risk of becoming extremely long, if each entry contained the subject's entire life story, which some of the entries did. It's just a list, and each subject's article is a mere click away.
2. Specific highlights change, and having to update the highlights in two places rather than just one (the subject's article) seems wasteful, and a way to introduce error through inattention.
3. Having some lengthy entries encourages editors who couldn't be bothered, to skip writing a proper article on the subject, and just plonk the information into the list instead. Yes, I know this doesn't assume good faith - Hanlon's razor is more my guiding principle, and is borne out by some of the stuff we've seen in that article.
4. I was using the lists of birthdates and deathdates in each day's article (take today, April 5, for an example), which contain the subject's nationality, and one or maybe two things for which the subject is notable, none of which are linked, as my guide. Simple and to-the-point. I'm a big proponent of the KISS principle.

Now if you think I'm crazy or misguided, please tell me. The short of it is that I just think it makes a big mess of the article.

In response to your comment above, I am concentrating on non-redlinks, which we should probably try to enforce in the main article as well. The List of albums articles, for example, all say in the navbox, "(all albums listed have articles in Wikipedia)". That doesn't seem like too outlandish a policy to apply to ALL the lists on the wiki, including this one.

Oh, and thank you for the Spivak pronoun in your latest comment on the main article's talk page. Things don't match up yet, and for me to claim anything specific now would be disingenuous. :) Hugs! — Wwagner 06:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just did an edit to the sandbox page; also, the sandbox's talk page is probably a better place to discuss the changes than here. Please give some feedback there on my latest edit; it was a good faith edit, but I think we've got some conflicts in our respective visions for this article. — Wwagner 14:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BigDT 21:30, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for fixing my reworking of the table in film formats. I hadn't planned on leaving it in that state, but the WP servers became unusably slow, so I had to leave it temporarily. Fourohfour 11:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad I could help. Those tables can be a little muddy when you're way down in the middle of one; it took me several tries to get my tweaks right. The wikitable markup is a whole lot easier to deal with, though, so nice work on the reformat. — Wwagner 02:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya - I see you undid my external link. Why is this classed as a 'link spam' unlike the other links? Tranny International is a valuable resource, non-commercial, supports the TG community, sponsors events link Sparkle in the UK - what is the issue? Beckie Cannons 19:12, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you to take a look at the guidelines about linkspam. As discussed in that article, Wikipedia is not the place to advertise a website. You added the exact same link and text to several articles, edits which had been done and reverted before, in some cases multiple times, to the very same set of articles. That's a strong indication that this site isn't an appropriate external link. A notice was placed on your user talk page that those earlier edits were also considered spam. Wikipedia is not a linkfarm. I also recall that you had created an article about the site in question, which has since been speedily deleted, likely due to speedy-deletion criteria G11 or A7. In short, while it's fine that you want to promote the website, Wikipedia is not the place to do it.

There have been any number of similar other sites which have been externally linked in various trans-focused articles; many of the editors who watch those articles frown on links like those, especially when added en masse to several of the trans-related articles. — Wwagner 04:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information - I've read those articles (you link above), but I'm now more confused that before - the criteria for the existing links is what then? Beckie Cannons 11:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They've been there, is pretty much why they're still there. Some of them almost assuredly don't belong, but inertia is keeping them there. In my experience, a lot of editors tend to focus on the recent changes to an article, and don't worry much about the stuff that's been there for a while. A short while ago, an editor wanted to do some cleanup on the external links in Transgender, and a few of the people who watch that article had a discussion on the talk page about the things the editor wanted to remove. If you want to suggest removal of some things, by all means post on the talk page about it. — Wwagner 01:42, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message on my Talk; response posted there. Pol098 00:56, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Wwagner. I just noticed someone raised concern about someone using your userbox on their page on a request for adminship [1]. The concern is that is uses a swastika; I feel if you used a different image, it would be more widely used, and less controversial, as it is a userbox which I would expect to be very widely used, but when I saw what linked to it, I was susprised, finding only 5 users use it [2], and realised it must be due to the image which is being used there. The swastika is a taboo in most places, and the swastika does not stand for correct grammar use, but instead, terrible things. Would you consider changing it at all? — jacĸrм (talk) 03:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The box itself is meant as a joke. The term grammar nazi is basically a joke; the cultural loading of nazi is such that nobody would go out of their way to declare themselves any kind of nazi, and yet we grammar nazis do. I copied this box from another user's example, because I thought it was funny. In fact, there are several other users who have similar boxes of their own: User:Babajobu, User:Cm kcl, User:Ericbailey, User:Marudubshinki, User:SheeEttin, User:Vanderdecken, and User:Vrba, and those don't include the four other users who use my userbox. User:Boddah has taken the nazi userbox, including swastika, in another direction, and it's meant to be funny as well. I'd hazard that the subject of Boddah's userbox, The Soup Nazi, is probably a strong part of the etymology of grammar nazi.

It's not my fault if someone doesn't get the joke. It's also not my fault that somebody else, who obviously does get the joke, is using the userbox. I welcome people to use my userboxes, and a few people do use them, which is just fine with me. If the swastika was a problem for any of them, then surely they would not have used it. So, the short answer to your question: thank you for your concern, but no, I will not consider changing the userbox. — Wwagner 06:57, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree with you, even though it may not have seemed so at first. I just wish to see the amount of controversy on Wikipedia to a minimum. I find it rather annoying also that a user who will most probably pass his request for adminship is being doubted on his skills in the admin area due to one userbox. On the RfA, I put "I'm sure if it was a bad idea for an admin to have this userbox on his page, it would be removed; since it's not, anyone is free to have it, and in no way should a userbox affect one's contributions towards Wikipedia. If you look through The Haunted Angel's contributions, you will see that nowhere does this userbox affect anything." Thanks, — jacĸrм (talk) 17:51, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DL12 Dragons of Faith.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DL6 Dragons of Ice.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DL7 Dragons of Light.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DL6 Dragons of Ice.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DL7 Dragons of Light.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DL12 Dragons of Faith.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 03:13, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Category:Isley Brothers albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:The Isley Brothers albums (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 15:58, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've uploaded File:Woxl st cover.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article Wipeout Pure expansion packs has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Solely composed of game guide information.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 05:31, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Soul Whirling Somewhere albums, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:09, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:DL12 Dragons of Faith.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 02:50, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:DL6 Dragons of Ice.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:05, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:DL7 Dragons of Light.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:05, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Neelix (talk) 14:19, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rest in Peace: The Final Concert 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rest in Peace: The Final Concert until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lachlan Foley 03:09, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 03:52, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:808state ex-el cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 11:04, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:808state ex-el cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:36, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:38, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:50, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:02, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Gt4 daimler.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:35, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Black Dog Productions albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Heldon albums indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:38, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]