User talk:Bungle44

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Kayleigh Crowe/Gibbs

Her name in the programme (as characters had referred to her as) was Crowe, as was her name on the website. The credits were erroneous. Trampikey (talk to me)(contribs) 22:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your CSD nomination on article Holy Family Catholic High School

Myself, being the creator of the article, would like to comment on your decision to nominate it for CSD. I have created many education/school related articles, and had you checked my contribution history, would see that it isn't a vanity article, nor an attempt as trying to make it notable. There are many stubs out there for different topics, most of which are accepted as articles which can grow in time. I don't agree with your decision to nominate it for CSD and assume you never really checked my contribution history. Bungle44 15:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, seeing as how the page is gone now someone on the admin side must have agreed with me. And btw, creating multiple useless pages does not change the fact that they are still useless pages. 150.113.7.99 19:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Sega PU

No problem, the article probably can be speedied. I have, however, already created an entry on AFD, so I don't know if the AFD template should remain. Koweja 17:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Td disk.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Td disk.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:06, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Teradrive_rear.jpg listed for deletion

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Teradrive_rear.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it, but use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. J Di talk 18:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject Emmerdale

I feel you may be interested in this. We only have two members Peterwill 17:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Template:Emmerdale

I think it takes up too much room to have their full names on it, so I changed it. If you'd like to raise the issues of the change, please raise it on the talk page of the template. Thanks -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 16:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Chris_chittell.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Chris_chittell.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:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. 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. Nilfanion (talk) 20:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Maybe you just don't see what I see?

I know that it depends on the computer as to how the pictures look. The first plane crash picture does look good on on the left. But, with the Kings River it looks too conjested unless the pictures are reduced, which shouldn't happen. The way the main storylines of emmerdale is now, looks good. Jameshdl 10.19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Emmerdale Changes

I hadn't noticed that there was an Assessment Scale for Emmerdale articles, I have been tagging pages but have also created the pages for the categories so for example we now have pages such as Category:Stub-Class Emmerdale articles which allow us to see all of the stub class entries for example. Do you think it is much easier to see the position if we have a separate assessment scale page? I will contine to tag articles for now, and can then always use these category pages to update the assessment scale in one big update once I am finished. The only issue I see with this is keeping it up to date when people who are not working with the project change the assessment whereas the category pages will automatically update themselves. --Amxitsa 15:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Emmerdale minor characters

I have noticed your disagreement with a couple of merger proposals on some of the soap's characters. I think the idea of the consolidated article was to list characters that appear on a recrurring basis too, not just those who aren't as important as the rest. I agree with you that several characters aren't really classified as "minor", but certainly would be classed as "recurring", and hence for that also don't support their claims for own articles.

Maybe a separate, but similar article by the lines of List of recurring Emmerdale characters might be a potential consideration? Bungle44 14:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


If an article called List of recurring Emmerdale characters was created than that should just replace List of minor Emmerdale characters. As all the characters on the "minor" are really recurring and with the title "recurring" it also doesn't diminish the importance of any of the characters put in it whereas an article entitled "minor" implies that the characters don't have an influence on the show and for the most of them that's not the case. Jameshdl 14:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)