User talk:PedanticallySpeaking

Home - Articles - Pics - RD - My RD - Qt - Useful - COMPORT - Signpost - News -Stats - EC -Collab - Writing -Stars -Admin - RFA -Links -Arbcom- IP 1 - 2 -3 - 4 - 5 - 6 TALK - AB - Box

Today is Wednesday, October 30, 2024. It is now 10:33 (UTC). Wikipedia currently has 6,903,510 articles. You are currently looking at User talk:PedanticallySpeaking on Wikipedia

This is my current talk page. Old messages are, those before February 1, 2006, are at User talk:PedanticallySpeaking/Old1.
Please post new comments at the bottom, unless you are replying to a message I sent you. In that case, would you please post it with the original below? Thanks. PedanticallySpeaking 17:48, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can click here to start a message at the bottom.

Would like to know who you are: please e-mail me ar admin@natenoy.com, I may need you to testify at the OEC.

At the Bottom, Please

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.

James John Parker Protection

Posted on User talk:Marudubshinki:
Why did you remove the semiprotection I posted on the page almost immediately after I protected it? Unregistered users keep trying to rewrite the article as a campaign statement and I was trying to prevent that. I see it happened again after you unprotected it. PedanticallySpeaking 17:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply of Marudubshinki

I removed it after a request on Helpdesk and because I did not think the vandalism and POV serious enough to warrant semi-protection. In other words, I think you were trigger happy with the protection. --maru (talk) contribs 17:18, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My reply

I was not "trigger happy." It is the first time I've ever protected anything since I became an administrator over a year ago. I posted a query about this on the administrator's noticeboard and someone suggested semi-protection might be advisable. The changes, which are lifted from the candidate's web-site (which links to the Wikipedia entry from the tagline "Who is Jim Parker?"), appear connected to the campaign. The changes have been made numerous times (see the page [history]). I gave notice of my reasoning on Wikipedia:Protected pages. I have consulted Wikipedia:Help desk and am unsure what question you refer to. Would you point me to it? PedanticallySpeaking 17:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply of Maru

Dude, the vast majority of helpdesk requests are made, and handled on, the mailing list. Let me put it this way- just today we had ~90 emails. What you see on that page is a tiny fraction of the true amount.

As for semiprotection, I standby what I said; it shouldn't be used until the vandalism is uncontrollable, multi-layered and complex. --maru (talk) contribs 17:38, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My reply

Thank you for your reply. Would you be able to send me a copy of the item from the mailing list? Or is it posted online someplace? PedanticallySpeaking 17:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

His reply

http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/helpdesk-l/. Link seems to be down now. I will paste the original request here:

"From: Jim Parker <parker309@msn.com> Mailed-By: wikimedia.org

To: helpdesk-l@wikimedia.org"

"I would like to have this page unlocked so that I can perform one final edit. Then we can lock it again. Somebody keeps changing it. Thanks."

"Jim Parker"

--maru (talk) contribs 18:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My reply

Thanks. This is the man the article is about. And we aren't supposed to edit articles about ourselves. I am grateful. PedanticallySpeaking 18:16, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posted on User talk:Splash
May I ask why you removed the "semi-protection" from this article? The person who it is about has repeatedly been modifying the article to promote his candidacy for Congress. This has been done from a series of IP addresses and this was my effort to prevent this. PedanticallySpeaking 16:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't. I removed the tag because the article was not (and currently is not) semiprotected. -Splash^talk 16:14, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Another removed the protection and I thought I restored it. Apparently I only did the alert tag on the page. Thanks for your swift reply. PedanticallySpeaking 16:19, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Holmes

Posted on User talk:Rossrs:

Greetings, Rossrs! Hope you are well. I've completely redone the article on the actress Katie Holmes and put it on WP:PR. If you have the time, I'd be grateful if you could add your comments to Wikipedia:Peer review/Katie Holmes/archive1. I hope to get it to WP:FAC soon. Thanks for your help. PedanticallySpeaking 16:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, PS! Great article I must say! I think the text is of a very high standard. I have replied at the PR page but to summarize my comments for you : my only concern is the images - some of them are unsourced and there is currently a bot going through Wikipedia deleting unsource images as possible copyright violation, so they need to be made right fairly quickly. I see that most of them were uploaded by User:AriGold so have left a message on Ari's talk page asking for information to be added to the image description pages. Hopefully we can get this all sorted out before it goes onto FA. I'm sure that this will be easy enough to fix - none of the images need to be deleted (except maybe the "Gap" advertisement) - they're fine, but just need the finishing touches to make them "legal" (or whatever the correct term would be....) cheers Rossrs 01:45, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Rossrs! Thanks for your comments on the peer review. I've tried to address the points you've made. I keep rereading and, alas, it seems like I find no end of errors. Let me know if you see anything else that needs attention. PedanticallySpeaking 21:15, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PS. I've tried again to trim the article in order to better suit it to becoming an FA. Instead of just reverting because it removed some of 'your' article, please could you actually review the edits. If there are some elements that you do not agree with, then by all means, repair them. Please try not to just revert the whole thing. The article, as it stands, needs a lot of editing and trimming to reach FA. Proto||type 11:29, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James Aubrey

Top-notch work! This article is one of the best in all of Wikipedia. Well-researched, cogent, and a pleasure to read. Eleemosynary 01:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your praise. And great user name, by the way. PedanticallySpeaking 15:47, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!!! To PedanticallySpeaking for 370 edits on James T. Aubrey Jr. Tvaughn05 _e ^(Talk)_(Contribs) 15:43, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your praise of my article. PedanticallySpeaking 15:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Holmes

Hey, I am so sorry but as I added them nearly a year ago, I have no idea where I got all of them from. The first picture, from Batman Begins, was from imdb.com (I think). The others, I honestly have no idea where I found them. AriGold 16:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I understand. It's hard to know just where things came from. I myself had to go back and check my notes when I put in footnotes on this article. It's just that when I've submitted a FAC in the past, usually the first thing I get for responses is "oppose" votes because the photos aren't satisfactory to some voters. Rossrs put in a note about the Oprah clip, I do know. Again, thanks for your support on this article. PedanticallySpeaking 16:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aubrey vandalism

Posted on User talk:Curps:

Thanks for your vandalism patrolwork on this article. I was surprised at the many, many edits made but in comparing versions, I see almost nothing I needed to fix. I wasn't able to get online this weekend to monitor it during its day in the sun on the front page. If I can help with your articles, please let me know. Again, thanks for watching over Mr. Aubrey. PedanticallySpeaking 16:48, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the opportunity to participate in the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Katie Holmes good luck with bringing it to Featured article status. I know you worked hard on that one and I keep it on my watchlist. Keep up the good work.--Dakota ~ ° 19:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hopkins School

Hopkins School is up for peer review, and anything you could note as a member of WP:Schools would be appreciated! Thanks! Staxringold 11:55, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posted on his talk page

Greetings, Stax!
I've looked at the Hopkins School article and posted comments on the peer review page. I probably come off sounding very harsh there, but I don't mean to be. I've gotten a number of my articles through this process (e.g. Katie Holmes, Tom Brinkman, Helen Gandy) so I'd like to think I'm familiar with the usual objections there. You have a very solid foundation for a FA, its just not there yet. Let me know if I can help again. PedanticallySpeaking 17:55, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the detailed commentary! You didn't come off harsh, I know what you mean (to a lesser degree, I'll admit) about the FA process. Check out my push for Cheers. :) I've tried to address what I can, though your rewrites were gold. A second set of eyes over the rest of the article would be greatly appreciated! Staxringold 20:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page deletion

Revolution within the form is up for deletion. I ask for a vote to transwiki. Thanks. WHEELER 00:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Johnson

Hi, I just noticed the 4th sentence in the 1st paragraph, a politics maybe reword it just a little? I would do it but not without discussion. Thanks.--Dakota ~ ° 07:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bob McEwen

Hi Pedantically! I'm not fully versed in IPA, but maybe you are. I know you've recently worked on making Bob McEwen into an FA (congrats, BTW), and I just realized you may want to edit his name pronunciation in the lead to IPA per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (pronunciation). Staxringold 00:52, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Johnson

Posted on User talk:Raul654:

I am trying once more to make this article featured (Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Bruce_Johnson). By my count the vote is 6 to 2 in favor of the nomination. Is this a sufficient ratio for it to be approved? PedanticallySpeaking 16:25, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Petro article

Having a great deal of respect for you writing, and your citations, could I ask you to take on the Jim Petro article? I stumbled onto it this morning while doing some article upkeep and while I played with it, it is in need of a total overhaul. Since you excel at these types of articles, yours was the first name that popped into my head. Stude62 15:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posted on User talk:Stude62:

Greetings, Stude62!
Thanks very much for your praise. Glad to see someone's noticing my labors here.
I see what you mean about this article. It looks like a rehash of an official biography. It does need work. However, to research it to the level I'd like is a big undertaking because Petro has been in public life for so long and the number of articles the databases will turn up will be staggering. I can't promise anything, but I will try to do something with it--at the very least rewrite this.
However, my main project right at the moment is my revision of my Bricker Amendment article, which I am completely rewriting in the hopes of sending it to FAC. Did you see my article on the incumbent lieutenant governor, Bruce Johnson, is now a featured article? PedanticallySpeaking 16:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC) (P.S. How, when your main interest is apparently cars, did you come to this particular article?)[reply]

watergate figures category pages

I am a newbie so forgive me if I am asking something stupid. On the watergate figures category page that you seem to have been involved with early on there is this odd link User:Trey Stone/Henry Kissinger sandbox 2 under "K" which seems totally out of place. Should it be there? I'm guessing not! --Slp 21:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posted on User talk:Trey Stone:

Greetings, Trey!
I saw your revision of the Henry Kissinger article you are working on. Good to see you taking on such a task. I did want to point out that articles in progress on user pages should not be placed in categories. What you can do so you'll know where to put it when the article is moved into the main namespace is either remove the wikilinks or put a colon after the opening brackets (like this Category:Living people). Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 16:04, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posted on User talk:Slp:

Greetings, Slp!
Glad to have you aboard. I looked at the Henry Kissinger page you cited and I've written User:Trey Stone about it. We aren't supposed to put works in progress like this article into categories. Only main name space articles should be in main name space categories such as this. See my message to him at User_talk:PedanticallySpeaking#watergate_figures_category_pages. Let me know if I can help again. PedanticallySpeaking 16:07, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad To Have You With Us!

Posted on User talk:SlimVirgin

Greetings, SlimVirgin!
I'd heard that you'd left us but I see you've made edits today. Glad to know you're still here. PedanticallySpeaking 17:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How Ya Been?

Posted on User talk:Bishonen:

Greetings, Bishonen!
We haven't talked in a long-time. I hope you are doing well. I saw your comment on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Carnildo 2 and wanted to say I agree completely with your assessment. When I first encountered Carnildo on the WP:FAC pages I looked him up and was surprised to see he was an administrator. How did that happen, I wondered? Then when I saw that he was trying to get back almost immediately after being desyopped (and desyopped for very good reason), I of course voted no. Anyhow, what have you been working on lately? I've just got Katie Holmes and Bruce Johnson to featured status. By my count, thirteen articles I've written have made it to "featured." (See Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured article nominations.) Ave!PedanticallySpeaking 17:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments

Posted on User talk:Giano
Greetings, Giano!
I saw your replies to Carnildo's comments on my vote on his new RFA and wanted to thank you for them. Notice that nothing he says actually addresses the points I raised, merely questions my motives for the vote. There's no point in my commenting on the page, one, because the vote is closed, and two, because he does not reply to people except to snipe as in this instance. If you need another admin's support in actions against this user, please let me know. PedanticallySpeaking 15:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply of Giano
Thanks. I though t you and Encaphlon spoke very well. I do not anticipate being troubled by this user again as I plan to put a great distance between us. The odd thing is I don't think I have ever had any contact with him before or since the famous episode - I certainly can't remember it if I did. I just wish he would teach that bloody orhanbot thing to read, then even that could stay away from me. Shame poor old Gmaxwell is still in the doldrums over it all, but there you are, can't make an omlette without breaking a few good eggs I suppose. Thanks for the message. Giano | talk 15:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My reply
I too have never seen this user except in regards to his negative votes on FAC pages. Never. (And I've been here 18 months, have 10,000+ edits, and have edited thousands of pages.) The only thing I see him doing is running OrphanBot, which drives many up the wall. (Just look at the comments on its and Carnildo's talk pages.) I really don't see anything he does except enforce his notions on images and snipe at anyone who questions him. If I can help you on your articles, let me know; my ambit lately has been pop culture (e.g. Katie Holmes) and Ohio politicians (e.g. Bruce Johnson) but I've helped out all over the place. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 16:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posted on User talk:Giano and copied here by PS
"If you need another admin's support in actions against this user, please let me know"? Dear god, could he be a little more circumspect in his eagerness to carry on a vendetta? How crass. OK, ok, I shall AGF and read it to mean "if you find yourself unfairly harassed by Carnildo and need some assistance, call on me." —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply posted on Giano and Bunchofgrapes's talk pages
The assumption I have a "vendetta" is precisely why people throw their hands up in disgust and walk away from Wikipedia. Your second reading is the correct one intended. PedanticallySpeaking 16:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posted on User talk:Bunchofgrapes
Then I got it right :-) All is well. If I offended, I apologize. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posted on User talk:Giano
I think your phrasing was a little unfortunate, but I take you at your word, and I'm sorry if my phrasing ("vendetta") went too far. Really. I made a mistake. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posted on User talk:Bunchofgrapes
Apology accepted. It's just that so many users shoot first and ask questions later and tend to assume the worst in people. Precisely the offense that got Carnildo deadmin'd. What sort of articles are you working on? PedanticallySpeaking 16:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphanbot and its master

Hello again PedanticallySpeaking! Firstly, I could not agree more with your comments above as well as those from said Rfa. Orphanbot raises some very serious concerns about the proper use of AI scripts to make what are, effectively legal and editorial decisions. The arguement that it is somehow "only enforcing policy", glosses over the fact it is not. It is enforcing ITS CREATOR'S INTERPRETATION of policy. I attempted to explain this to the Carnildo formally known as admin, and you can see how sucessful I was in the endevor. That so many come to his defense, perplexes and disturbs me. It's almost as if they feel "someone has to be the bad cop here" and he is best suited for the role. For me, this gives every reason to oppose and none to support. Here is another reason [1] . I also noticed the bot had been sniffing around some of your pics of Ohio pols[2]. But at least it does appear to have Gained a posse. Standing up to him and the other Copyright Vogons and bullies in Rfa, FAC and the talkpages is a good start. But if we are to be truly effective against them, we will have to mobilize and orgainize into some form of association- A Fellowship for Free and Fairuse maybe? Here we will be able to pool our resources, support one another, and help with such problems as finding the right tags for images, which the CV Vogons are usually unwilling or unable to do. Only a very small number of images pose a serious threat of lawsuits. The overreactionry behavior by Carnildo and the Copyright Vogons is well out of proportion and unjustified by the actual danger. Their Nuremberg Defense no longer holds up, assuming it ever did to begin with. We need our own defense. Thank you for your time, inspiring words and taking a stand.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:12, 31 March 2006 (UTC) PS Or Simply "Ghost" to his friends;>[reply]

Posted on RDH talk page

Greetings, R.D.H.!
Thanks for your message re the recent RFA vote on Carnildo. I have read your discussion with him regarding OrphanBot's deletions and could not agree more with your position. My objection is he seems to feel that any image that lacks an explicit message from the copyright proprietor saying "I give Wikipedia consent to use this image" must be deleted. He's ignoring decades of fair use precedents, a rigid form of "copyright paranoia" as you have justly labeled it. This is the view of big corporate powers. Many people are ignorant that copyright exists not to make them rich but to supply Americans with things to read, watch, listen to, etc. Other than a few images from Playboy, I can't say I've seen images that aren't fair use here.
My last encounter with Carnildo was on the Bruce Johnson [candidacy]. All the disputed pictures were publicity photos on official Ohio web-sites. No state document or report I have ever seen--I'm an Ohioan--has ever claimed copyright. I contacted Bruce Johnson's press office and they told me they claimed no copyright in the pictures. But even that wasn't good enough. It's very frustrating because I have no idea how to satisfy him and Johnleemk. If either of them had a copyright law background--not even as attorneys, but dealing with rights--I'd be more inclined to accept their views. I really don't understand either user.
Anyhow, best wishes to you. Let me know if I can help fight "copyright paranoia". PedanticallySpeaking 19:11, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is amazing ...everything u said it was just awsome

Thank you

Thank you for your vote of confidence in my recent request for bureaucratship. Even though it didn't pass, I greatly appreciate your support and hope I will continue to have your respect. Thank you! Flcelloguy (A note?) 23:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James Aubrey photo

Posted on User talk:Raul654

Greetings, Raul!
Hope this message finds you well. I observed today that the photo of Aubrey, a featured article, had been removed from his article and that the image (File:JamesTAubrey.jpg) was missing (deleted?). Would you be able to tell me anything about what happened to this image since clicking on its title is a dead-end. PedanticallySpeaking 16:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the page history for the deleted image page:

19:06, March 10, 2006 Howcheng deleted "Image:JamesTAubrey.jpg" (orphaned fair use image tagged more than 7 days (I5))
18:01, March 2, 2006 . . PedanticallySpeaking (remove orphan)
03:12, March 1, 2006 . . Roomba (WARNING: This fair use image has been tagged as orphaned because it is not used inline. If it is not used in the article namespace within 7 days, it will be speedy deleted.)

Direct complaints to user talk:Howcheng Raul654 21:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Holmes on the Main Page

I read what was said at Talk:Katie Holmes, and I just want to say that you shouldn't listen to that, because it is an excellent article that deserves to be read by many people. Also, I consider the subject of the article to be interesting, and I'm sure many other people do too. Not only is it a great article as it stands, but a lot of other editors will be influenced by it when contributing to other articles on similar topics. Extraordinary Machine 23:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Posted on User talk:Extraordinary Machine

Dear Extraordinary,
Thanks for your kind words on my talk page about the Katie Holmes article. Yes, this is a most unserious subject, but she's an interesting person and much in the news lately so is certainly "feature-worthy." I've seen articles on far more important topics that haven't been researched as thoroughly as I did this one. I am gratified by your comments on my hard work. They made my day.
Do let me know if you have an article you're working on that you need another pair of eyes to examine. Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 15:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bob McEwen on the front page

Posted on User talk:Raul654:
Greetings, Raul!
Hope this message finds you well. I've put a notice on the talk page for Wikipedia:Tomorrow's featured article asking that my suggestion Bob McEwen not be featured until I can update it. I have been working on other things since it achieved featured status and there is material from the campaign that should be included. In addition, next Tuesday is the primary election and I'd like to include that as well. I will let you know when I add this additional material. PedanticallySpeaking 15:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bricker Amendment

Posted on User talk:Kaisershatner:
Greetings, Kaiser!
Some months ago you were helping out on the Bricker Amendment article. I unfortunately got sidetracked on other issues, e.g. making Katie Holmes a FA and getting her on the front page, but I've been working on a complete revision to the article. My work-in-progress is at User:PedanticallySpeaking/In Progress2. I still have quite a bit re the congressional consideration to add but I wonder if you have anything to add about what I have so far. Thanks for your help. PedanticallySpeaking 16:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

David R. Smith

This article has been VfD'd and the deletion upheld by consensus at DRV. Your recreation is inappropriate, please don't do it again. User:Zoe|^(talk) 18:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recreation of data which has had consensus to be deleted is considered vandalism, and repeated recreation is grounds for blocking. User:Zoe|^(talk) 22:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I only speak that way to people who continue to flout consensus and policy. User:Zoe|^(talk) 17:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Zoe!
I don't understand your reply at all. Your first move is to bludgeon someone with the threat of expulsion?" That's hardly a civil way to act and I thought we had a policy about that. What of our "assume good faith" doctrine? It is hardly likely to secure cooperation when you avoid making peaceful overtures to secure compliance and enter making threats. I think of "flies with honey". I gather this is your usual practice—to judge from the first comment on this talk page—and I do not think your approach is necessary of justified. Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 15:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bricker

Hi, thanks for the note. That $^!&^ Caro book is on my desk, glaring at me. I've been reading it intermittently for two months and I'm still learning about the type of desks they have in the Senate room. But seriously, it's great that you've inserted all of that stuff. I think it could be synthesized into the article pretty easily - why don't you take a run at it. I'd be happy to contribute/copyedit/proofread/whatever. Then maybe we can take another run at WP:PR and potentially WP:FAC.

Merger of Webster's Third New International Dictionary

I'd like to know why you merged this with Webster's Dictionary, despite clear consensus against the move at Talk:Webster's Dictionary. Please respond on that talk page. Gene Nygaard 05:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcom Teratornis

Posted on User talk:Teratornis

Greetings, Teratornis!

Saw your page because of your work on my Middletown and Cincinnati Railroad page. I also did the Cincinnati, Lebanon, and Northern Railroad article. I've written a number of southwest Ohio articles and am glad to see another contributor. Let me know if I can help you out. Good work on the Lebanon Countryside Trail article, by the way. PedanticallySpeaking 15:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed event policy for Wikicalendar

I recently posted some ideas about developing criteria for what should and should not be listed on Wikicalendar events at the Wikicalendar's talk page. Since you're actively involved in this project, I thought I'd let you know so that you can comment or add more suggestions. Thanks :). Fabricationary 00:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases

I have recently begun reviving the Supreme Court case project since the founder is inactive. You're welcome to drop on by and help us out if you are still interested. There's also a discussion going at the project's talk page. Enjoy your Memorial Day! btw, read your user page. I hope you'll stay with wikipedia. We need more dedicated wikipedians like yourself. and i'd never heard of "dord" before! --Kchase02 (T) 06:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Notification

Hello! I noticed that you have interacted with user:Staxringold who is currently undergoing an RfA and thought that you might be interested in participating at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Staxringold 2. You have received this message without the endorsement of the candidate involved, and this is not a solicitation of support, it is only an effort to make RfA discussions better (for more information see user:ShortJason/Publicity). Thank you in advance for your participation. ShortJason 19:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TFA

Nice one! Congrats. Kaisershatner 02:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on today's Featured article. I am envious because several of the Featured articles on which I have worked were editted to death and subsequently lost their status. I have no doubt this one will survive as a Featured article as long as you and the other contributors watch over it. Although I am completely uninterested in politics, this article appears to have an appeal to the general reader because there is a story arc in it. Good one. --Ancheta Wis 15:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Loveland, Ohio

Hi, it looks like you claimed a long time ago that Loveland, Ohio was the only Ohio city that existed in three counties. [3] It looks like Dublin, Ohio also has this distinction, being in Delaware, Franklin, and Union counties. I've removed that part from the article and two of its translations; if you can find anything to back up this claim, feel free to add it back in. In any event, thanks for contributing to my hometown's article. :^) – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 03:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hey, You're Back

Yup - I've been back for a few months, though I really haven't been able to dedicate the kind of time that I've really been wanting to dedicate. You know, real life and all. I've been generally well overall, but I've been locked in my lab for months (which wouldn't be so bad if I had some windows). How about you? – Clockwork Soul 22:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's good to hear that you're back; I've been back from my extended break for a while now, everything's been going pretty well. --M e rovingian {T C @} 02:20, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again

Hi, Ped. I've just been to Normandy for a few days (that's the one in France). Got my first view of Mont St Michel - fantastic! Deb 11:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so envious. I visited Mont St Michel a few years ago. Amazing place! And at night it is spectacular... I'll have to try to find a good night photo to add to the article. I would love to go there again. Anyway I didn't come here to join a conversation uninvited :-) But I did want to say hello PS. Hope everything's going well for you. With me, nothing special to report but everything is good. Welcome back !! Rossrs 13:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't go through the tunnel this time. We took the ferry from Portsmouth to Caen, which saved an awful lot of driving. (From here to Kent would have taken about five hours in the car.) As the crow flies, I suppose it's only about 300 miles - that's a wild guess. Deb 16:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: I'm Back--How Are You?

I'm fine, thanks! I finished all of my exams earlier this month, which is good. Thanks for the comments about my RFA; it's nice to have support from somebody as experienced as yourself. I should note that I haven't been patrolling the Holmes article and so I didn't notice that you had left, but it's great to have you back anyway. How are you? Extraordinary Machine 17:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am doing Media Studies, Film Studies, Psychology and Maths. I also did Critical Thinking this year but that's only a one-year course, so I won't be continuing it. I like what you've done with the Bricker Amendment article in your progress page; it's very comprehensive and well-written, and I found the background sections particularly informative. I did notice a few errors, and the "State precedents" and "Aftermath" could be expanded, but otherwise it's really good. And thanks for the congrats...now I'm just worried about accidentally deleting something :). Extraordinary Machine 21:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Yeah, I was a bit surprised by the number of the support votes, though I wouldn't say that everybody liked me (though I don't really mind if they don't). On an unrelated note, I was wondering if you could take a look at the article Number 1's (Mariah Carey album) and leave a comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/Number 1's (Mariah Carey album)/archive1? It would be much appreciated, particularly because I'm worried that I'm not seeing basic mistakes. Extraordinary Machine 22:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal on Notability

Because you're a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians, I'm notifying you that the inclusionist proposa Wikipedia:Non-notabilityl is in progress to define the role of notability in articles. Please help us make this successful! Also note the proposal Wikipedia:Importance is a deletionist proposla that seeks to officially introduce notabiltiy for the first time. Make sure this is defeated! --Ephilei 22:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nixon etc.

I kind of caught the Nixon bug after our Watergate collaboration. My latest biggie with him is a master list of Nixon political opponents.

Speaking of, would you be interested in weighing in on these AfDs?:

I'd like to see separate articles. Vote your conscience, though!

I saw you had a couple of FAs lately! Congrats! Jokestress 16:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ohio Maps

You are very welcome - glad to help. Do you think a blank series of Ohio county outline maps would be useful? They could be filled in to make locator maps (see Allen Township, Hancock County, Ohio for an example). Ruhrfisch 17:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Salutations!

Greetings PedanticallySpeaking!

You left me a nice message on my talk page which I was not around to immediately respond, so now I'm returning the favor. The answer to your quearry can be found HERE. In the meantime have a great break:) Sapere aude, --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

bricker

Thanks for the note; I've also been away away from WP, sorry to have missed the PR and stuff. I'll try to put some work in when I get a moment. NB I'm on page 230 of the Caro biography; finally getting quite interesting... Best, Kaisershatner 15:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kent-Meridian High School

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kent-Meridian High School, I just thought you'd like to know that the consensus for deleting High School articles now appears to be swinging back in favor of deletion. So this may indicate the beginning of another campaign to remove most High School articles. Your opinion on the AfD article would be appreciated. It might be helpful if a notability standard for High Schools could be agreed upon. Thank you. — RJH (talk) 16:37, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Ohio school districts)

You created this proposal more than a year ago. It received little discussion, and it seems to very particularly apply to Ohio school districts. Do you think it should be deleted? —Centrx→talk • 06:52, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do not think it should be deleted. I have tried my best to get people to comment on it, posting notices on many Ohio pages. I had also hoped that it might serve as an example for naming articles on other state's school districts. PedanticallySpeaking 16:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Why not have it be a naming convention for all school districts in the United States, or have there be a single guideline that allows for the few different types of naming in the United States? —Centrx→talk • 19:41, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

back for Bricker

you pulled me out of temporary retirement; see full copyedit and note some comments in my edit summaries as you have access to the primary sources, also see comments at WP:FAC. Good job, now back to RL for me! Kaisershatner 01:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lip reading/Speach reading

I am profoundly deaf. I went through 6 month of Walter Reed Army Hospital's Deaf/Lip reading prograam. What a joke. Ok, that's enough of that.

Mu point is that actress Diane Lane is the most perfect for "speech reading" I've seen. I always have to have CC, but even so I need more. It would be great if someone would suggest to Julia Stiles to get every Diane Lane movie, cut out the Lane segments and see how she does what she does. Stiles could not possibly mimic Lane becasue their faces are made different. Stiles has an almost China Doll face and until she is older she will have to work with that, but that doesn't mean that with effort and practice she can't make her face express as Lane does with a difference of course. And it's not just the face. Sometimes (often) Lane will react to an actor and then turn and react again. I have a favorate insance, but I'll cut this down and quit.

Col. Charles Souleyret, USAF Ret mickeys4@sbcglobal.net

Returning the favor?

I was quite pleased to see that Bricker Amendment has successfully passed all of the trials and been granted FA status. :) I was wondering whether, of you have time, you would mind taking a look at my peer review request for caffeine? Cheers! – Clockwork Soul 20:51, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Holmes

I removed the link to katieholmespictures.com from the article on Katie Holmes. Generally, picture galleries aren't considered appropriate (see WP:EL). I'm rather surprised that you added this link so if you think there's an extenuating circumstance for that link, please feel free to bring it up in the discussion page. --Yamla 17:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's that we have a policy against picture gallery links. But could you tell me where that is? PedanticallySpeaking 17:18, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EL doesn't specifically forbid it but picture galleries tend to fall into the list of sites not to add. It's easy enough to find pictures of Holmes just by doing a google image search (which returns about 66,300, though many are duplicates). So the site doesn't add anything of value (and hence, WP:EL says it probably shouldn't be added). Additionally, picture galleries in general tend to play fast and loose with copyright and so we try to avoid such sites so we can't be blamed for contributionary copyright infringement or whatever it is called. It's not absolutely clear, mind you, which is why I mentioned to you that I was removing the link rather than just rolling it back as vandalism or something (note: your addition of the link clearly was not vandalism). --Yamla 17:26, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

Greetings, Ral315!
Congratulations on being made the new editor of Signpost. I've not been very active recently, so I've been catching up by reading the signpost and just now saw the story on Michael Snow's departure. I'd be interested in writing for you--if my other obligations permit. So a preliminary question: How do you handle stories? Do you assign them or do people come and propose topics to you? PedanticallySpeaking 17:01, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Generally users just pick a story, posting that they're going to write about it here to avoid duplication. Technically the deadline's passed for this week; if you have something to write about for this week, make sure to get it in by about 22:00 UTC. I try to have stories done earlier so I can publish with a reasonable time frame, but I'm battling IT at my school right now, so it might be a little late. Ral315 (talk) 17:36, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost article

Hi - I am new writing for signpost, but just list the topic, and a page where you are prepareing the article (if it exists - or where you want it to be) and sign your name under Special Stories in the newsroom. Good luck and thanks for helping. --Trödel 16:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I didn't see your note. Yes, feel free to write about the patent office. Ral315 (talk) 19:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Armenia

Please visit the Talk: Armenia and Talk: Armenians pages http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Armenia&action=edit&section=3 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Armenians&action=edit&section=36 please voice your view on the current discussion, there is a small minority that are promoting and point of view that Armenia is geographically in Europe and Armenians are a European people. It is best to serve the factual truth and your support is desperately needed.

Township maps: updated copyright tag

Hi. Noticed that the {{pd}} tags on your township maps were showing up as obsolete, so I updated them to the {{PD-USGov}} tag. --KeithB 13:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kings Island

Thank you for reverting the location of Kings Island to Mason. I was about to revert it but you got to it before me. It is easy to confuse since Kings Mills is nearby but, as you stated, Mason annexed the park in 1997. Thanks again. Dblevins2 23:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up

Here is the advanced notification you requested -- Bricker ammendment will be the featured article on October 28. See Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 28, 2006 Raul654 02:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I tried emailing you, but your email is disabled. Raul654 02:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bob McEwen

Heyo. Just thought you might like to know the image I uploaded for this article is having it's fair use status disputed, so if you can either find a free replacement for it or expand the fair use rationale that might be useful. Staxringold _talk^contribs 20:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note - the image has been redeleted (under CSD G4, recreation of correctly deleted content). Proto::► 09:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:CharlesWSanders.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:CharlesWSanders.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I fixed their 'unsourced' problem. We love bots, don't we. --Matthew K 17:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HolmesBat.jpg

You restored the deleted image, Image:HolmesBat.jpg. This image is in violation of WP:FUC and was deleted according to policy. Can you please explain why you restored it and then removed the tag indicating that it is in violation of WP:FUC? --Yamla 17:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The photograph is clearly a fair use as it is a promotional photograph distributed by the studio to promote its product. PedanticallySpeaking 18:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but fails Wikipedia's first fair-use criteria outlined at WP:FUC. "No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information. [...] However, if the subject of the photograph still exists, a freely-licensed photograph could be taken." The subject of the photograph, Katie Holmes, still exists (she's a living person), therefore a free equivalent could be created. Thus, the image fails WP:FUC which is why it was tagged as such, and the deletion was according to process. We are not permitted to use fair-use images solely to depict living people, as is the case with this image. --Yamla 18:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiwiki1950

Add your name to the ist of wikipedians who are against wikkipedias position of the Akron wiki article (they want to delete it)

Julia Stiles

Julia Stiles is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality. Sandy (Talk) 21:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Random House Dictionary article

You wrote the original article on the Random House Dictionary, and I later expanded it. In June, 69.0.49.44 removed statements made by you and ones made by me. I want to check with you about your statement:

"Following the controversy over Webster's Third New International Dictionary, published in 1961, Random House decided to expand the American College Dictionary into a full-fledged competitor to the Webster's Third."

69.0.49.44 changed it to:

"In the late 1950s, it was decided to publish an expansion of the American College Dictionary, which had been kept up to date with each reprinting since its publication."

I tend to think 69.0.49.44 is unreliable because I have copies of the ACD and it was scarcely altered over the years.

Do you know where you got the info in your version? I don't know when the RH decision was made, but I am inclined to your version, so I will fix the article if you can offer a basis for it. Abstrator 19:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LtGovBruceJohnson.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:LtGovBruceJohnson.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Oden 07:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More replaceable fair use images

—Chowbok ☠ 00:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WGA screenwriting credit system FAR

WGA screenwriting credit system has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Gzkn 07:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ThomasABemmesforCongress.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:ThomasABemmesforCongress.JPG. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Oden 06:11, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:LtGovBruceJohnson.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:LtGovBruceJohnson.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Oden 06:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oden 06:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better Source Request for Image:DanaGioiaNEAchairman.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:DanaGioiaNEAchairman.jpg. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talkpage. Thank you. MECU≈talk 01:22, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tomkat wedding.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tomkat wedding.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ytny (talk) 02:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An AfD you might want to see

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ohio second congressional district election, 2005/Minor candidates youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 00:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you interested in a city wiki for Cincinnati?

Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. You mention being wikibonked. You mention being fed up with the combative nature of Wikipedia. Who wouldn't be? Nobody wants to spend hours slaving over articles only to serve them as fodder to deletionists. Lately I have become increasingly aware that many article disputes might become less arousing if people chose the right wiki to begin with. I recently helped solve an editing dispute by suggesting another wiki suitable for the non-encyclopedic portions of an article; in that case, everybody won.

I'm toying with the idea of starting a City wiki for Cincinnati (perhaps calling it Cincypedia if the name is available), to run on MediaWiki for easy editing by Wikipedia veterans. Since you have contributed to a vast number of Wikipedia articles about Cincinnati, and your wiki editing powers are great, you would be among the first Wikipedians I would want to recruit, and likely promote to administratorship in relatively short order. I'd imagine emulating established city wikis in terms of operating model and policies, such as:

Davis wiki
Akron Wiki - Akron's own w:City Wiki (released July 2006)
city-wiki-center, city-wikis have homepages on it
A guide to running a City Wiki by Mark Krenz from Bloomingpedia

Since the wiki would likely have few editors initially, a relative handful of dedicated editors would have substantially more editorial freedom than is possible on Wikipedia, and fewer problems with content warring and deletionism.

Please let me know if you would have any interest in a city wiki for Cincinnati. As far as I could determine, nobody else has started one yet. --Teratornis 20:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 01:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}[reply]

Featured article review of Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United States has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dawsoncreeklogo.jpg

Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Dawsoncreeklogo.jpg) was found at the following location: User:PedanticallySpeaking/Articles. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 02:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:James Doohan 1980s.jpg

Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:James Doohan 1980s.jpg) was found at the following location: User:PedanticallySpeaking/July 20. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 09:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naming of schools

Have you see the debate on the wikischools pages ... Victuallers 18:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

nb

Image:Tomkat wedding.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tomkat wedding.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Doc^g 14:39, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Dawsonscreekalbumcover1.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Dawsonscreekalbumcover1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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 00:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Dawsonscreek2ndseasondvdcover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dawsonscreek2ndseasondvdcover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:17, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Schmidt FAR

Jean Schmidt has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.--SallyForth123 01:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Dawsonscreek1stseasondvdcover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dawsonscreek1stseasondvdcover.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. BetacommandBot 01:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JohnWGriffin.jpg

I have tagged Image:JohnWGriffin.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Calliopejen1 22:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

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

Stubs: GlenOak High School; Patriot Athletic Conference; The Three Musketeers (Supreme Court); Timken High School; Anthony Wayne High School; Michelle Henke; Miami Valley Career Technology Center; Urban township (Ohio); Martha Coolidge; Plain Township, Stark County, Ohio; Kaley Cuoco; Stivers School for the Arts; West Carrollton, Ohio; Griffin Bell; Badger, California; List of urban townships in Ohio; Ashland High School (Ohio); Elizabeth III of Manticore; Babcock and Wilcox

Cleanup: Bizarre (rapper); Band geek; Holy Cross Convent School
Merge: United States presidential election, 2004, in Ohio; List of United States Presidents by date of birth; Zacarias Moussaoui
Add Sources: Anderson Township, Hamilton County, Ohio; Nick Lachey; Maumee River
Wikify: Sagwa, the Chinese Siamese Cat; Running With Scissors, Inc.; Whistleblower
Expand: Drew Lachey; Zinedine Zidane; Edwin Meese

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 14:36, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Florida Atlantic University

I saw that you did a nice peer review for Hopkins School and was wondering if you would mind taking a look at the above article. It is currently undergoing peer review here. If things turn out well I plan on taking it to WP:FAC next.

Thanks, KnightLago 20:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Featured List of the Day Experiment

There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 21:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOTD experiment

My userpage List of the Day experiment is getting under way at WP:LOTD. One of your lists has been nominated. I invite you to come by and represent it. If you would like to represent your list article please reformat your username in the table so it is normal sized. Among the things you may want to do to represent your list are:

Change the image selection
Add talk page projects to the list and then add them on the summary table
Write a summary of the article in less than 500 characters. I will begin doing this later today for those who don't do it themselves.
Participate in the feed back process when it starts on December 1.
Participate in the voting when it starts on December 11.

You are free to remain uninvolved. Your list was chosen for being among the first [[WP:FL]s ever created.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 19:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FA Review

James T. Aubrey, Jr. has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Questioning minor 1st paragraph edits?

Re: John Roberts, John Paul Stevens, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Samuel Alito, Sandra Day O'Connor
This is a small matter. I don't understand the reasons for Sjrplscjnky's recent minor edits of articles about each of the Justices of the Supreme Court. After some time, there has been no response to inquiries posted on this editor's talk page nor has there been feedback from similar postings on the talk pages of each of the nine articles about a sitting Justice and the one about retired Justice O'Connor. Rather than simply reverting this "improvement," I thought it best to solicit comment from others who might be interested. I found your name amongst others at Talk:Supreme Court of the United States.

I'm persuaded that Sjrplscjnky's strategy of introducing academic honors in the first paragraph is unhelpful in this narrow set of articles -- that is, in Wikipedia articles about Justices of the Supreme Court. I think my reasoning might well extend as well to others on the Federal bench. In each instance, I would question adding this information only in the first paragraph -- not elsewhere in the article.

In support of my view that this edit should be reverted, please consider re-visiting articles written about the following pairs of jurists.

A1. Benjamin Cardozo
A2. Learned Hand

B1. John Marshall Harlan
B2. John Marshall Harlan II

The question becomes: Would the current version of the Wikipedia article about any one of them -- or either pair -- be improved by academic credentials in the introductory paragraph? I think not.

Perhaps it helps to repeat a wry argument Kathleen Sullivan of Stanford Law makes when she suggests that some on the Harvard Law faculty do wonder how Antonin Scalia avoided learning what others have managed to grasp about the processes of judging? I would hope this anecdote gently illustrates the point.

Less humorous, but an even stronger argument is the one Clarence Thomas makes when he mentions wanting to return his law degree to Yale.

As you can see, I'm questioning relatively trivial edit; but I hope you agree that this otherwise plausible "improvement" should be removed from introductory paragraphs of ten articles. If not, why not?

Would you care to offer a comment or observation? --Ooperhoofd (talk) 20:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vaoverland

Hadn't heard from you in a while. I see you noted I was dormant for a while in summer of 2005 (this was do to relocating). Since later that summer, I have pretty active and busy with WP again, although a lot of time went to Jamestown 2007-related WP articles. Hope you are well. Yours, Mark in Historic Triangle of Virginia (talk) 05:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shortcut WP:NAC

I see you have the shortcut WP:NAC linked in your user space. This currently links to the community portal. Would you be opposed to eliminating this shortcut redirect to the portal in order to reuse it for Wikipedia:non-admin closure? You are one of two people currently using the shortcut, according to it's "waht links here" special page. Thanks, JERRY ^talk _contribs 16:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone forward with usurping this redirect shortcut. Please elt me know if you see this a s a problem. JERRY ^talk _contribs 20:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aubrey

Hi PedanticallySpeaking, we've never met and I'm not sure if you ever even read this page anymore. I see from your contribs that it's been awhile since you were active. I recently did some work adding the inline citation method to James T. Aubrey, Jr. I know some editors don't like inline citations, so I hope this doesn't look like I took a hatchet to all your hard work. I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed learning about Aubrey from your research. I hope that you feel un-bonked some day, but if not I hope you know that your work was appreciated. --JayHenry (talk) 19:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Jean_Schmidt_Clermont_Sun.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Jean_Schmidt_Clermont_Sun.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 17:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Ohio county name etymologies

You have made many edits at List of Ohio county name etymologies which is under discussion at WP:FLRC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Calendar

Which places still use the Julian Calendar? There is Mount Athos, and "a village in England" - but is there anywhere else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackiespeel (talk • contribs) 18:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Dawsonscreekalbumcover1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dawsonscreekalbumcover1.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) 12:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Brinkman

Tom Brinkman has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 13:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Edward Johnson

Bruce Edward Johnson has been nominated at WP:FAR.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:12, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Helen Gandy

Has been nominated for a WP:FAR. Concern is 1c, in-line citations. Maybe you can fix this easily if you can relate the references list to the sections of text that they refer to. Buckshot06(prof) 04:47, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FAR: W. Mark Felt

W. Mark Felt has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

FAR: Cricket

Cricket has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. - auburnpilot talk 02:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article review of Cincinnati, Lebanon and Northern Railway

Cincinnati, Lebanon and Northern Railway has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Tom B (talk) 14:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Bruce Johnson and Jennette Bradley.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Bruce Johnson and Jennette Bradley.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 01:45, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FAR Warren County Canal

I have nominated Warren County Canal for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tom B (talk) 12:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of July 20/Births

I have nominated July 20/Births, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/July 20/Births. 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. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 19:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image permission problem with Image:Butler County Ohio Map.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Butler County Ohio Map.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jay32183 (talk) 09:13, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:Sandra Beckwith.jpg

File:Sandra Beckwith.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Sandra Beckwith.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Sandra Beckwith.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello PedanticallySpeaking! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 6 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 691 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Meg Goetz - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Nina Repeta - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
John Wesley Shipp - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Henry Curtis Lind - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Henry Putzel, Jr. - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Charles Kimbrough - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:27, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clement Attlee

Hi there. With regard to your page User:PedanticallySpeaking/July_20 I hoped you might to know that Clement Attlee is spelt thus, and not with a single T: Atlee. Hope this helps, best wishes, DBaK (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the 2010 Attlee Spelling Campaign. Motto - "It's not major, but it's The Major"

Dear PedanticallySpeaking,

Some sorries: firstly, sorry for bothering you again; secondly, sorry that this is a bit of a form letter (although, actually, it has been exclusively personalized for you in at least two places); and thirdly, that I come over as a mad or maddish person suffering from some form of OCD ... which, unfortunately, is about right.

I'm writing to ask if you would please consider correcting the spelling of Clement Attlee on your page here:

User:PedanticallySpeaking/July 20

where it is currently misspelt Clement Atlee. Please?

Since I do have a bit of a bee in my bonnet about this, I see it often - probably more often than is healthy - in searches and so on. Your correcting it would not only very slightly improve the sum of correct human knowledge, but would also lessen the chances of my suddenly attacking someone on the Tube for snoring, pushing, spitting, sniffing, reading the wrong novel, or whatever - so really it is a double benefit to personkind. I could also attempt to bribe you with Linzertorte, though it would have to be virtual unless you can easily make it to London, EC1 in order to be bribed in person.

I can't tell me how happy it would make me if you would please correct this small but (I think) important matter.

Thanks and best wishes, DBaK (talk) 13:09, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I see that you may well have left, and that the page in question has been edited, without apparent controversy, by plenty of other editors since you started it. So, if you don't mind, I will leave it a few days for a response, just in case, and then change it for you, in the hope that this is generally a helpful and positive move. If you do mind, I will no doubt be hearing from you. :) Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 13:34, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. A week has elapsed, and I am now changing it, per all the above, and hope you approve. Thanks and best wishes, DBaK (talk) 09:11, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Bruce Johnson's family at swearing in.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Bruce Johnson's family at swearing in.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:58, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Bruce Johnson giving inaugural speech.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Bruce Johnson giving inaugural speech.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:59, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Dawsonscreekalbumcover1.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Dawsonscreekalbumcover1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 12:02, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:HarryMRosenfeld.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:HarryMRosenfeld.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:29, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Frank E Holman.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Frank E Holman.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:45, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of James John Parker for deletion

The article James John Parker is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James John Parker until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Jayron32 04:53, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Hello, PedanticallySpeaking! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 20:25, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:CharlesWSanderswithBillClinton.jpg needs authorship information.

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:CharlesWSanderswithBillClinton.jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided),authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which:{{subst:usernameexpand|PedanticallySpeaking}} will produce an appropriate expansion,

or the {{own}} template..

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:13, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Michael K. Allen

The article Michael K. Allen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability not established - which for a negative BLP is reason enough to delete

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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. Scott Mac 22:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cissy Patterson

nice work. Decora (talk) 00:48, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Holmes article concerns

Hi - I'm a bit concerned about some aspects of the Katie Holmes article, and I was wondering if you're still interested in the article. I've posted more about it on Talk:Katie Holmes. Thank you. --Malkinann (talk) 01:46, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Xeno (talk) at 12:41, 1 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Please do not delete my adminship privileges.PedanticallySpeaking (talk) 13:41, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Noted - you can safely disregard the message. –xeno^talk 13:44, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Watergate figures

Category:Watergate figures, 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. Mike Selinker (talk) 15:16, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Suri Cruise AfD

Hello. You previously voted in the 2006 AfD for Suri Cruise. At the time, Suri was less than 10 days old, and the ultimate verdict was to turn the article into a redirect to her mother's page.

Since then, Suri has become much more notable in her own right as a toddler fashion icon, with over 13 million hits on google image search. After getting an administrator to lift the protection on the redirect, I recently restored the article as a stub, but an editor who believes that "6 year olds are not inherently notable" has again requested deletion.

If it's not too much trouble, I'd appreciate your making your opinion known at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suri Cruise (2nd nomination) Warren Dew (talk) 07:26, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove my adminship privileges. I am still around and have control of this account. PedanticallySpeaking (talk) 15:47, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you make an edit or administrative log within a year, you won't be desysopped for inactivity. Just replying to this notice means that you won't be desysopped. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 20:54, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Charles W. Sanders

The article Charles W. Sanders has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, no reliable sources, tagged for years without improvement. Does not meet WP:POLITICIAN.

While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Huon (talk) 13:46, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Labor leaders

Category:Labor leaders, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Graham11 (talk) 07:04, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Global account

Hi PedanticallySpeaking! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 20:59, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Have you been found?

You were listed at Missing Wikipedians. It seem you aren't 'missing' any more? 220 of ^Borg 10:01, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 12:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 01:30, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi PedanticallySpeaking.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Max Angus

You're welcome, it was your addition to the Deaths in 2017 list that prompted me to start the article! --Canley (talk) 01:23, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:FCCSeal.gif

Thank you for uploading File:FCCSeal.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Leann Hunley for deletion

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Kirbanzo (talk) 17:57, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email
Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak
Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:33, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Berniece T. Hiser

The article Berniece T. Hiser has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NN author, fails the GNG, WP:AUTHOR and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Meets none of the criteria of NAUTHOR. Notability tagged for over a decade.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ravenswing 09:26, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Berniece T. Hiser for deletion

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ravenswing 09:40, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FAR notice

I have nominated Bob McEwen for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 01:02, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FAR notice

I have nominated Bricker Amendment for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:17, 27 March 2021 (UTC))[reply]

Coordinators and help needed

Hi, if you are active on Wikipedia and are still interested in helping out with urgent tasks on our large Schools Project, please let us know here. We look forward to hearing from you.

Sent to project members 13:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC). You can opt of messages here.

FAR notice

I have nominated Cincinnati, Lebanon and Northern Railway for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 04:26, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Middletown Junction, Ohio

The article Middletown Junction, Ohio has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable railroad junction, fails WP:GEOLAND and WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. –dlthewave ☎ 12:17, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Protecting a Page - Public Official

I stumbled upon vandalism of a public official and would like to see the page protected. I edited it back to remove the vandalism.

Here is the page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Milgram — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ckoian (talk • contribs) 00:01, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with my suggested edits

I have been informed by wikipedia that two of my suggested edits were refused because they were not helpful. I am writing to inform you that AT NOT TIME have I made ANY suggested edits to this page or anything like it. I've never even seen Dawson's creek. Since this was some time ago, it may have already resolved after a prior password change nonetheless: I have changed my password and assume someone else made the edits by somehow accessing my account. Be advised that some of your contributors my be trolling the page.

I don't know what else to do about this and apologize for their actions with my name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Squireson (talk • contribs) 07:18, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Fernand Fournier-Aubry moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Fernand Fournier-Aubry, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Fernand Fournier-Aubry has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Fernand Fournier-Aubry. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 03:16, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please vote in the 2022 Wikimedia Foundation Inc. Board of Trustees election

Hello hello. I hope this message finds you well.

The Wikimedia Foundation Inc. Board of Trustees election ends soon, please vote. At least one of the candidates is worthy of support. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:02, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Judges death date incorrect

Judges death date incorrect. Says september 16 2023. 2601:2C1:8C00:19A0:7972:D48:5335:3855 (talk) 22:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Fernand Fournier-Aubry

Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Fernand Fournier-Aubry, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:01, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Columbia Tri-Star Television" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Columbia Tri-Star Television has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 12 § Columbia Tri-Star Television until a consensus is reached. From Bassie f (his talk page) 20:32, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Columbia Tri Star Television" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Columbia Tri Star Television has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 12 § Columbia Tri Star Television until a consensus is reached. From Bassie f (his talk page) 20:38, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Fernand Fournier-Aubry

Hello, PedanticallySpeaking. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Fernand Fournier-Aubry".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:05, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 31

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Russell case, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paternity. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:44, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jim Betts (politician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bud Brown.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:56, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of prematurely reported obituaries, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Curry.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:24, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:21, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]