User talk:Mb1000

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Google's hoaxes

Hey there. Could you please let me know why you insist on that particular size for the images at Google's hoaxes? They are looking far too big in my browser. violet/riga (t) 20:39, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It's generally seen as poor wikiquette to blank your talk page, especially when somebody is asking you a question. Please let me know your reason or I will put it back to 80px. violet/riga (t) 20:51, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Coulter picture

The Image:Ann coulter.jpg is marked as being a screenshot of a website. It looks great, but nothing like a webpage. Can you either change the tag or give us the full webpage? Also, the URL of the page too. Thanks, -Willmcw 20:46, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

A screenshot is the entire screen. More generally, there doesn't seem to be a need for two photographs of Coulter from TIME, especially since they were taken at the same time. I'd suggest just using the TIME cover and forget about the portrait. Cheers, -Willmcw 04:02, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

You have several times removed the infobox on Everybody Loves Raymond. You may think the infobox is ugly but its information value is very high in my mind. I suggest you try to make the infobox less ugly instead of removing it. I am the same user with IP 130.241.154.213 by the way. Dixon 09:50, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Image:Square one.jpg

Same problem with another picture that this user uploaded (above);

it's saved picture from a photo gallery from [1] and not a screenshot. And like the Coulter article, there's already an existing photo that serves it purpose well.--Madchester 22:43, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Canadiansenate.jpg

Image deletion warning The image Image:Canadiansenate.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it will be deleted. If you have any information on the source or licensing of this image, please go there to provide the necessary information.

Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 09:48, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome, BTW

Welcome!

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -SV|t 22:28, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mesa

Ive reverted your changes, though Im interested in hearing your argument against the terms - please do so on the relevant talk page. Youll notice that adding the NPOV notice requires the addition of comment to the talk. Sinreg, SV|t 22:28, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi - your blanket revert, without commenting on the talk at all, kind of violates the DBAD policy. -SV|t 00:22, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Toonie

[edit] Image:Toonie.jpg

Image deletion warning The image Image:Toonie.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. If you feel that this image should not be deleted, please go there to voice your opinion.

(I uploaded Image:Toonie-reverse.jpg instead.) --Robojames 17:31, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Troops

What makes you think the US has over 1 billion troops? In "thousands" means it is followed by "000" -- Earl Andrew - talk 02:45, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Sorry, misunderstood the numbers. They're just so confusing, it's like who thinks of 1 million troops as 1,000 x 1,000? --Mb1000 28 June 2005 16:16 (UTC)

Well, I didn't want to put "000" after all the numbers, since they were all estimates. Plus, many credible organizations do just as I have. -- Earl Andrew - talk 28 June 2005 16:27 (UTC)


Could it be changed? --Mb1000 28 June 2005 19:56 (UTC)

[edit] Earlpedia

Yeah I noticed that. :) -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:01, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

So what do you think? Like it? --Mb1000 03:17, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Canadian FAC

I notice yall were trying to get some Canadian articles featured. How many Canadian articles are even at that status? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 17:41, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

How should I know? All I know is that I think there should be more Canadian articles featured, becuase a lot of people don't know too much about Canada, and I think they should! --Mb1000 17:49, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

All I know is one: Order of Canada, because I worked on that one. I am going to get their fork articles featured, but I can try to get the full list in a few minutes. I am also going to help you on your FAC, the Canadian Heraldic Authority. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 17:58, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, help is always appreciated! --Mb1000 18:04, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Check the page now, you will be surprised at what I have done. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 08:31, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!!! Liked most of the changes! --Mb1000 16:50, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] FedEx formatting

Hi!

I noticed that you added a group of blank lines to FedEx Corporation in order to make the picture of the FedEx Kinko's store not overlap with the next section. Unfortunately, the blank lines have some unexpected effects, and make the article get a ton of whitespace if a user has a narrower browser. A better way to do it is to put <br style="clear:both" /> where you want the text to reclaim the full width of the window. I've done this in the FedEx article, I just wanted to pass along this tip to you. :)

Thanks. kmccoy (talk) 18:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

You put a cleanup tag on FedEx -- did you have any specific issues that you might mention on the article's talk page? kmccoy (talk) 17:35, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, the article generally looks cluttered. There are a lot of "red links", some of the text is not properly spaced, and there are too many lists. --Mb1000 18:37, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the notice about the Dec. It is P.D. and is now labelled as such. jengod 20:09, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

You're very welcome! But you forgot to removed the UNVERIFIED notice! Don't worry I'll do that for you. I see on "Kate's user edit counter" that you have over 31,000 edits, WOW! How long has it taken you to do all that? --Mb1000 00:28, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Images on Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Monarchy_in_Canada

Thanks for adding the copyright for the other two. Let me know once you either have copyright for the third image or remove it from the page and then I will change my vote to support. Cheers! --K1vsr (talk) 19:35, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bringing Wikipedia to Toronto

I've been working on a bid to bring Wikimania 2006 to Toronto. I have contacted KMDI, an institute at the University of Toronto. They are very interested in partnering with us, and can get us a full range of U of T facilities for free. With this offer I think there is a very good chance of bringing Wikimania 2006 to Toronto. The only thing we currently lack are people willing to help out. I'm willing to do much of the work, but for the time being I am in Ottawa and having some people on the ground in Toronto will be necessary. We also need a number of people willing to assist at the actual event, likely the first weekend of August 2006. If you are interested in helping out sign up at Wikimania 2006/Toronto. Preliminary bids from various cities need to be made by Sept. 30, 2005, at which point a committee will choose which city gets to host the event. The number of people willing to help will certainly be an important consideration. - SimonP 18:04, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Wikimania 2006 will be very similar to Wikimania 2005, which was held in Frankfurt, Germany last month. See the Wikimania 2005 website for more information. Wikimania is both an academic conference for those studying Wikipedia, and a gathering of Wikipedia editors to socialize and discuss issues relating to Wikipedia. Some 300 to 600 people are expected to attend.
I'm not yet sure what work will need to be done. On the weekend of the conference we will definitely need a team of organizers at the event to set up and administer it. In the period running up to the conference it is important to have a few people in Toronto who can run errands and such. A large number of people will be necessary to take reservations, sign up speakers, and set up the schedule, but most of this does not need to be done locally. Help planning is also useful, and any input to the bid proposal at Wikimania 2006/Toronto would be appreciated. - SimonP 18:49, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA

Per your comment about a possible change of vote, I regret to say that I think you might need a little more time underneath your belt before you are ready to tackle the tasks of admin. Since I have never encountered you here on Wikipedia, I'm basing this off the information given to me: your talk page, edit count, other RfA comments, and your edits themselves. Your talk page is a bit sparse, and several of the messages are for unfree image deletions. This shows that you have not interacted a lot with other users. Your Wikipedia:, User talk: and Wikipedia talk: just reinforce this. Don't get me wrong: I think that your edits look good, and you are a fine editor. But half of adminship is communicating policy and ideas to other users. I'd like to see some more experience in these areas. As I said on your RfA page, I will support in a month or so. Hope this clarifies things up a bit. Cheers, Bratschetalk | Esperanza 03:22, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I usually vote for people I bump into, so no offence, but I won't be supporting since we've hardly interacted. User:Nichalp/sg 07:51, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Alright :) --Mb1000 13:57, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Josh Quittner, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. For more information about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, take a look at our Five Pillars. Happy editing! Edward 11:41, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Okay, but I've been at Wikipedia for a while... --Mb1000 15:25, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your RFA

I'm sorry to let you know that your RFA has been rejected my the community. You may ofcourse try again later. User:Nichalp/sg 05:54, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Michaëlle Jean's Arms

  • We managed to upload this at the same time! How wierd is that. I also uploaded at [2] at around the same time as you. I was writing an "Arms" section when you put your image in. Great minds..... Astrotrain 16:43, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Great minds indeed! Well one of the two images needs to get deleted. Sorry, but yours will have to get deleted! Before reciving your message I had already added my image to two other articles, Canadian Heraldic Authority, and Governor General of Canada, so It would take time to replace and why bother?. To make things simpler I also replaced your image with mine on the Michaëlle Jean page. So now my image links to three pages, while your image doesen't link anywhere. I'll list yours on images for deletion, if you don't mind. --Mb1000 16:58, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
  • OK then! Astrotrain 17:09, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Thanks. As Donald Trump says, "It's nothing personal, it's just business." :) --Mb1000 17:13, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User Categorisation

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Ontario page as living in or being associated with Mississauga, Ontario. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Mississauga for instructions.--Rmky87 02:33, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Bushtexas.jpg

Currently this image lacks source and copyright information. Could you please add them, or the image will be deleted after seven days. Evil Monkey - Hello 04:53, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Square One Shopping Centre

Please do not revert the changes to the article (i.e., restoring the photos, instead of using the gallery). The article itself is only 300 words long, and there's no need to crowd it with three photos within the main text. Thanks. --Madchester 18:38, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Please do not make any further reverts, or you'll be on your way to a temp. block via the three revert rule. And it's not a good addition if you're going thru another RFA.
If you look at a page like Toronto Eaton Centre, it has three photos within the main body, but that's because it's 2000 words long; the photos also compliement the information being presented. The gallery is a fair compromise; the photos could have simply been removed from the page. --Madchester 18:45, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

But the gallery look terrible. --Mb1000 18:47, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Mb1000, I like your earlier work on the Square 1 page, but I like the gallery look, you can read the article first and then move your eyes down to the logos and stuff. Save yourself a revert war, let the gallery stand.Jok2000 21:19, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

First of all, thanks for saying you like my work on the Square One Shopping Centre page. But what's the problem with the images being in the body of the text. I just don't like the look of a gallery with just 2 images in it. How 'bout if I put the logo at the bottom and the photograph of the Cityside entrance at the top with the aerial pic? I just really don't like the gallery thing for this page.

Now on something else: I see your're a Torontonian, where abouts? I'm from Mississauga.

--Mb1000 22:28, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files. The guidelines do not condone "Collections of photographs or media files with no text to go with the articles." There's no need to place excess photographs when A) the article is not particularly long and B) they don't necessarily add my encyclopedic value to compliment the text. Otherwise, the gallery is a good compromise at the moment.
For the sake of preventing an edit war (and saving some face for a future RFA) I'd suggest that you shouldn't continue with the edits. Thanks. --Madchester 23:22, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
Please don't make any further reverts to the article. You've been warned about instigating an edit war and ignoring the guidelines of what Wikipedia is not. Thanks. --Madchester 20:40, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I am trying to avoid an edit war, but you insist on your erroneous interpreation of what Wikipedia is not. I have no choice but to continue to revert. --Mb1000 22:34, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the page Square One Shopping Centre: This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You've been warned multiple times of what Wikipedia is not; as stated previously, the rules do not condone using pages as Collections of photographs or media files without the appropriate text. Your actions will result in a block if you continue to revert the page without due cause. Many shorter articles will use a gallery to display additional photos away from the main text (i.e., Harajuku Lovers Tour 2005, Air France Flight 358) --Madchester 22:49, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:BUILDING.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:BUILDING.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. MetsBot 20:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

--Colonel Cow 23:39, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Ontariogov.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Ontariogov.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. MetsBot 20:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

--Colonel Cow 23:42, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Square One Shopping Centre

I am a member of the AMA and I've been asked to take a look at this page and see if I can't resolve a conflcit invovling pictures. Let me know if it is not too late or if you need assistance. I am willing to be an informal mediator (try to help the parties work out a deal) or an informal arbitrator (here evidence and offer my non-binding opinion). I'd love to be able to help. Just let me know.Gator (talk) 13:40, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

To Mb1000, plz don't revert changes to the article until the AMA process has been completed. Thanks. --Madchester 07:31, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Seigenthaler

Was the reply you got written by Seigenthaler? Michael Hardy 01:11, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Opinion Rendered in Square One Shopping Centre

I have reached and rendered an opinion as an AMA third party neutral with regard to the Square One Shopping Centre article. I hope it helps resolve the dispute.Gator (talk) 16:50, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Hello

...Is there something you would like to ask me? —Hollow Wilerding . . . (talk) 01:37, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

No. Just joining the conversation. --Mb1000 02:29, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
I understand the edit wars that you have been involved in. However, the fact that three images are huddled together in an article the size of Square One Shopping Centre is not particularly acceptable. I would be willing to allow three images (because it doesn't overwhelm the article, as they say) to remain in the article as long as it is expanded upon — otherwise as per Wikipedia:Images, this is a violation. I would also like to note that these images have no copyright rationale. Therefore, above any other discussion or argument you have add with other users, if the images do not attain the proper rationale within the next six days, they will be listed for deletion. —Hollow Wilerding . . . (talk) 13:44, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


The current version of the article is not a violation of the images policy. User:Gator1 in his neutral third party opinion on the article talk page stated:

"I examined the policy cited by Madchester and believe that neither version of the page violates this policy. Madchester was concerned that the pictures clutter the text, but Mb1000's latest version seems to do no such thing...

"While there are a large number of pictures for such a short article, Mb1000's placement of them as of December 16, 2005 at 03:50 is not, in my opinion, in violation of policy and is more pleasing to the eye."

Also, to which photograph are you refering to regarding copyright rationale and sources? All three images on the page

are properly tagged and sourced. --Mb1000 15:02, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually it's still in violation of Wikipedia:Images, which is another policy altogether. Note that the AMA is not final and binding; it can still be subject to change. Also Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. 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. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.. Thanks.

[edit] Request for adminship

You have my support. Zach (Smack Back) Fair use policy 23:14, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Mb1000 - thanks for your message on my talk page. I am glad to see you have stuck with Wikipedia and are again considering adminship. I would like to support your nomination, but I am concerned by the amount of controversey I see here. There are allegations of revert-warring and even vandalism. Of course, accusations are not the same as fact. Could you provide a little summary of what you feel is going on with these disputed edits and allegations of misconduct? Thanks, Johntex\talk 17:46, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank-you for your response. I am glad to see that you do your research before supporting a candidate. The allegations of vandalism you are mentioned are false. I have been an anti-vandalism advocate on Wikipedia since joining. Yes, I did get into a pretty ugly edit war (my first one), but trust me, I did not enjoy it. A particular user, Madchester, has attacked my particular version of the article Square One Shopping Centre. He claims that it contravenes Wikipedia image policies, and is grossly arranged. I disagreed, and still do. I took the issue before the AMA and the user who took our case sided with me on the issues. Madchester did not care one bit about the desicion of the AMA menber, he simply brung up other "reasons" for taking my version down. He simply kept reverting my edits, and I kept reverting them back, often with some salty remarks in the edit summaries. The page had to be locked for a while, but things have finally calmed down. I hope that this childish episode will not be counted against me. Everybody makes a mistake they regret. (remember Bill and Monica? :) I'll be the first one to admit that I could have tried harder to avoid an edit war by just backing down, but I guess that's just human nature. I hope that I still have your support. --Mb1000 19:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. You say you "hope that this childish episode will not be counted against" you. I think that mistakes should count against people and not be forgotten. At the same time, those mistakes have to be considered in context of mitigating factors and also balanced against other factors. In this case, your forthrightness, your contrition, and most importantly, your good work overall, are persuasive to me. Therefore, I would be comfortable voting to support your nomination based upon what I have read. Please let me know when your nomination comes up so that I may register my support. Naturally, I have not looked at every single one of your edits, so if someone points out that there are lots of other "mistakes" in there - I'll be obliged to look at the new evidence. Hopefully there are no such problems waiting for you. I wish you the best of luck in your nomination. Johntex\talk 19:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your support. I will notify you as soon as I begin the process. I will try my hardest to be a good administrator, I will not let Wikipedia down. That is my promise.

In case you are not familiar with my work here are some articles I have worked on:

That is great - you may want to mention these in a very basic User Page. That may help your nomination wtih some of the voters. Johntex\talk 21:32, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Canadiansenate.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Canadiansenate.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Adnghiem501 00:14, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TIME magazine

Please be careful with your reverts, although you may have intended only to revert a badly formatted infobox, you also reverted several other changes. I don't think it's reasonable to be so lazy as to revert a whole article just because you don't like the edit one person did. Thanks. --Rebroad 00:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)Thanks for telling me. --Mb1000 02:39, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My vote on your RfA

I apologize if I have indeed misunderstood your intentions, but I have had some bad experiences with users attempting to use user talk pages to change the natural results of consensus. I hope you'll continue contributing to Wikipedia - as I said in my comment under "Neutral", I think most everything you said in your response to question 1 are things you can do today without admin status. (ESkog)(Talk) 19:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA

I was happy to support, even though it might not pass. --King of All the Franks 01:23, 30 January 2006 (UTC) Thanks. --Mb1000 04:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA did not pass

I regret to inform you that your RfA was closed early today by bureaucrat Raul654 as a failing RfA. Please do not take this as a condemnation of you or your contributions to Wikipedia. RfAs are only an assessment of the community's opinion about your potential as an administrator at this point in time, not for all time. I encourage you to take the lessons from your now closed RfA and use them to improve yourself as a Wikipedian. You are of course welcome to apply again for administrator rights at a later date. I recommend you wait at least a month, if not two or three months. If you have any questions on this, please feel free to ask me. --Durin 16:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I saw your comment about your RfA at Raul654's talk page [3] and his response. If you'd like, I can reinstate your RfA. You can of course do it yourself if you like. There's no reason why you have to have Raul654 do it, since he's essentially said you can. --Durin 20:28, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
  • It's reinstated now. --Durin 21:16, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! --Mb1000 21:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:Google gulp carroty.jpg

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Google gulp carroty.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}} 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. Stan 12:54, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:Patricia heaton.jpg

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Patricia heaton.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}} 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. Longhair 10:18, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA

Your adminship nomination didn't achieve consensus. Please look at the reasons voters opposed your nomination and this will be a big aid to succeeding in the future. Many initially failed nominees have gone on to be admins later. Cheers, Cecropia 05:53, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

==Image copyright problem with Image:Ann coulter.jpg==

Thanks for uploading Image:Ann coulter.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Tawker 00:43, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Canadian_senate_throne.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Canadian_senate_throne.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 09:48, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Bigthreetime.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Bigthreetime.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Ta bu shi da yu 12:49, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Prince_Edward_presenting_CHA_Letters_Patent.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Prince_Edward_presenting_CHA_Letters_Patent.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 01:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image Tagging Image:Carlos bernard.jpg

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Carlos bernard.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) 16:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Ontariogov.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ontariogov.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Stan 05:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


templates substituted by a bot as per Wikipedia:Template substitution Pegasusbot 06:26, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:241002.jpg)

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:241002.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that 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 fair use 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. meco 13:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:3RR

Please be aware of the WP:3RR policy at Michael Behe. FeloniousMonk 18:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)


As a past editor of the Wikipedia article on Michael Behe, you may wish to weigh in on the (mediated) discussion now taking place on its Discussion page. ChulaOne 21:25, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Heraldry Stub

I noticed that you changed the heraldry stub template twice to include the coat of arms of the College of Arms. This doesn't seem proper to me. Using the arms of the English heraldic authority on stubs of all heraldic traditions seems a bit odd, and also forgoing a public domain image for an image with no licensing information can't be right. Is there a reason that you've changed the image and reverted my revert? Thanks.--Dave Boven 13:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] How is Square One considered bigger than Metrotown?

I've noticed that my edit to the Square One article about it being only the third largest mall in Canada has been removed. Yet if information on the Square One and Metrotown wiki pages is to be believed, Metrotown is clearly the larger mall (MT 1,783,005 sq. ft., 470 store, 1,600,000 square feet SO 360+ store) Also the Metrotown wiki has also made the second-largest-mall claim (although I've noticed it has also been switched back and forth a few times), so both can't be true. Personally I'm a big fan of Square One, but I'm not really seeing what these claims about it being second-biggest Canadian mall are based on, other than perhaps some sort of Mississauga pride (I remember a few years ago reading in the Mississauga News about claims that Square One was actually Canada's largest mall, because the West Edmonton Mall is an entertainment centre rather than a mall).

I'd be interested to know what the case is for Square One being bigger than Metrotown.

The Square One mall says it is number two, and other independant websites agree. See discussion on the Metrotown talk page. --Mb1000 17:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Mb1000, please see the response I received from Metrotown on the Metrotown talk page. Thanks. Carson 06:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Copycontrol

Add that fair use image one more time and you will be blocked for violating criterion 9 of fair use policy. Johnleemk | Talk 03:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Brad garrett.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Brad garrett.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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 files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may 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. ResurgamII 18:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Steven Spielberg.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Steven Spielberg.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}. If you have not already done so please also include the source of the image; in most cases the website where you found it.

Please signify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ResurgamII 18:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Doris_Marie_shocked.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Doris_Marie_shocked.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. 06:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Frank_Barone.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Frank_Barone.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. 07:30, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox shopping mall

I have reverted your chnges on the Template:Infobox shopping mall as your edits do not describe your actions. You've removed critical scripting which enabled parametres not to show if not completed. The template employs some extremely complicated and esoteric features of template syntax.

Please do not attempt to alter it unless you are certain that you understand the setup and are prepared to repair/revert any consequent collateral damage if the results are unexpected. Any experiments should be conducted in the template sandbox or your user space.

The only tasks at hand is to repair articles which use the template, not the template. Cheers, Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 09:41, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My image on Square One Shopping Centre

Re: Image:Square One Shopping Centre.jpg. True, there's a slight blur to it, but it's better than nothing at the moment. How about we keep it in until we have a better shot available? I figure it's better than nothing. --Brad Beattie (talk) 08:19, 26 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image:Betty-Nguyen 1000.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Betty-Nguyen 1000.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. 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}}
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

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. – Quadell (talk) (random) 20:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image:ROM Crystal.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:ROM Crystal.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. 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}}
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

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. -- Chowbok 17:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ray romano.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ray romano.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. 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}}
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

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. -- Chowbok 22:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Robert Zemeckis.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Robert Zemeckis.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. 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}}
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

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. -- Chowbok ☠ 04:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:TIME Person of the Year 2006.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:TIME Person of the Year 2006.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. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, 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.

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 fair use images 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. -- tariqabjotu 02:35, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TIME revert

Thanks for the revert back to "Person of the Year." I was about to do the same as that is more consistent with TIME magazine. On CNN they referred to You as "Persons of the Year." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jbergquist (talk • contribs) 02:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Recentism is What Makes Wikipedia Great?

You must not know what I was referring to; see Wikipedia:Recentism. Recentism is the tendency to put undue weight on more recent events and that is, by definition, not a good thing. On the whole, the 2006 Person of the Year is trivial. What is more important is the assortment of Persons of the Year. For that reason, I urge you to move Poty.jpg back to the top of the Person of the Year article. -- tariqabjotu 03:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

And, by the way, this is not a valid fair-use rationale. -- tariqabjotu 03:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

See Talk:Person_of_the_Year#Keeping_Poty.jpg_at_the_Top. -- tariqabjotu 08:21, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help Prevent Article Deletion: Religious Perspectives on Dinosaurs

Hello, I'm leaving you this message because I notice you've made at least one significant edit to the Wikipedia article Religious perspectives on dinosaurs. The article has recently been nominated for deletion from Wikipedia, and there is considerable support for that position.

I'm hoping you'll help me support the continued existence of the Religious perspectives on dinosaurs article by registering a keep vote on the article's request for deletion page. The article contains some good information, and represents an unobtrusive way to present notable minority viewpoints about dinosaurs that cannot reasonably be elaborated on in the parent article. It shouldn't be deleted simply because the viewpoints it presents aren't "scientific."

Thanks! Killdevil 03:54, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Untagged image

An image you uploaded, Image:Cse badge.gif, was tagged with the {{coatofarms}} copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as {{seal}}. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 17:57, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Personal_Coat_of_Arms_of_Governor_General_of_Canada_Michaëlle_Jean.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Personal_Coat_of_Arms_of_Governor_General_of_Canada_Michaëlle_Jean.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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. 12:00, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] iPhone image

Hey there. Yes, I know the "free" image is not as good as the promotional. And I know it is pretty bothersome to write a fair use rationale everytime we upload an image. However, Wikipedia aims at freedom, not "prettiness", and as such, we need to use fair use only when absolutely necessary. In the case of the iPhone, it could be said that the free image Image:Apple-iPhone.jpg gives even more information than the promotional one, because it also gives information about its depth, and not only width and height. The fair use criteria, point 1 is clear: if there is an image that is "freer" than another, use it. The information given in the promotional one is by no means much more different than the one in the free version. -- ReyBrujo 21:06, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] future product

I don't know why you removed the {{future product}} template from Apple TV, but it's completely undisputable that the product is not yet available. Apple's own web site states that the product ships in February, and last I checked, that's in the future. I've restored the template – don't remove it again, unless you can provide proof the product is shipping or is available in stores. -/- Warren 01:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removing tags

Please do not remove tags, such as you did on Image:Graem Bauer.jpg, without resolving the underlying issue. In this case, you can learn what is required of a detailed fair-use rationale by reading Wikipedia:Image description page. Thanks! --Yamla 22:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Square one logo blue.png)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 07:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Canadian Heraldic Authority Review

Canadian Heraldic Authority 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. --Eva bd 21:38, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inappropriate user talk warning

With regards to your comments on User talk:Levelsevenmage: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. I know that Levelsevenmage (talk • contribs) was vandalising, but this warning was not cool. It violates WP:CIVIL. Please don't do this in the future. Regards, Flyguy649talkcontribs 05:09, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Sweeten_bros.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sweeten_bros.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. 10:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/b/1/User_talk%7EMb1000_7e1f.html"