User talk:B0sh
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome!
Hello, B0sh, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions; I hope you like it here and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- If you haven't already, drop by the new user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
- Always sign your posts on talk pages with ~~~~ so others will know who left which comments.
- The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
- Our policies, guidelines, and simplified ruleset
- How to edit a page and write a great article
- The Wikipedia tutorial and picture tutorial
- The handy Manual of Style
- And finally, remember to be bold in updating pages!
I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian. Although we all make mistakes, please keep in mind what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.
Happy editing!
-- Sango123 17:48, July 18, 2005 (UTC)
P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)
[edit] Re: Vote for Deletion
Hi, B0sh. Thanks for leaving a message on my talk page. I'm not heavily involved with Votes for deletion, but I believe about 5 days after an entry is submitted, the votes are tallied, and if there is a concensus to delete, an admin deletes the article. As of today, I think majority of votes for Bosh is Keep. Regards, Sango123 20:45, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] 3 Revert Rule
Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. Thank you. Note that the rule applies to any number of accounts or IP addresses created by the same person. -Splash 15:09, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah no problem, i wasnt aware of the rule until some1 pointed it out to me in the edit comments. I just throught it was harsh to write a new description before the orginal had been judged. I wont restored it anymore, especially under other accounts or ip's...im not trying to cheat, i just want to define something that i feel deserves defining.
Is there an approch where 2 definitions can exist?
- Ok. You could try adding your definition to the 'new' page which effectively contains several meanings already (hence the term 'disambiguation page'). However, I think it may prove difficult to keep your text on the page...the most serious problem with the information you give is its lack of authoritative verifiability. -Splash 13:44, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
- Listen to Radio 1 the UK's biggest radio station, and hear it said daily
[edit] Image Tagging Image:Cleveland brown.jpg
 |
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Cleveland brown.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam (T/C) 10:24, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Leighton Group
I am unsure whether the company profiled at Leighton Group reaches the notability level required by WP:CORP - I do remember getting a copyvio deleted that was a copy and paste job from their website (which I can't access at the moment), and it didn't strike me as all that notable. What was concerning me most is that another Leighton Group is the biggest construction company in Australia, active across much of East Asia, part of the Hochtief group (also containing the largest construction companies in the United States and Germany), and was at one stage going to construct the tallest structure ever built, the Solar Tower. That company certainly meets the notability guidelines of WP:CORP, and being, as far as I can see, the most important, largest and well-known company with that name, should probably be allocated the Leighton Group article. Might your article belong at Leighton Media instead? Then once the article on the Australian group is made, there could be a Leighton Group (disambiguation) page, linked to with a WP:HATNOTE from Leighton Group. Does that sound like a sensible arrangement? TheGrappler 20:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Sorry im unsure or the correct way to respond to this so ill write here. I dont have any strong opinion on this. I added the page because i had an interview there and wanted to find out more about them on going toLeighton page someone else had already added a dusambig for the sunderland based leighton so i just added a page. --B0sh 13:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
