User talk:Acidburn24m
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article 100 best novels and non-fiction books of the 20th century, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:100 best novels and non-fiction books of the 20th century. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Klacquement 23:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:43things logo.png)
 |
This file may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading Image:43things logo.png. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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.
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 14:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image tagging for Image:Smbnew.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Smbnew.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. 11:03, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Witch's Wheel
I didn't merge it. See Revision 79748503 for the change on the 5th. I am just fixing the double redirect. --- Jagged 23:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RE: Witches' Wheel
Just curious as to why you un-directed the Witches' Wheel article. The reason I redirected it in the first place was that there was no unique information that could not be effectively conveyed in either the Enterprise (ride) article or the Cedar Point article. If this particular Enterprise had done something incredible, like kill someone or cause significant legal or media action, I would support an individual article. However as it stands, this aprticular ride is one of at least thirty otherwise identical rides.
Maybe the redirect would have been better to Enterprise (ride), as it is the ride type, but I chose to redirect to Cedar Point as the information merged out of the article went into Cedar Point. Your thoughts? -- saberwyn 04:52, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] non-religious
A minor note. Your user page links to non-religious so I'll run this by you. I am planning to change the redirect from irreligion to secularism, for two reasons. Irreligion is currently a terrible article, and even when improved will probably be ambiguous. And secularism is what most linking incidences of non-religious seem to mean anyway. If you have any objection to this change, please drop by my talk page. — Coelacan | talk 07:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] There is no need for the word notable
I saw your list of notable anime. There are many great works of anime that have become popular in Asian , European, and Latin American countries, but are unkown in the USA because of lack of a proper English dubbed version. Just because it is not known in the USA does not mean is notable or great. Why don't yuou just make a list of anime series without the word notable since it cannot be really defined and classify it by decade. In other words: Include all anime series known to man. As It would have more information about the anime genre. Others like me can contribute to this page on a daily basis.Angel,Isaac 05:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Notable_anime_TV_series_listed_by_year"
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Lower Galilee Council-logo.PNG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Lower Galilee Council-logo.PNG. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 14:10, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
