User talk:Melbob
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] AVHowell
copy at mel uni special collection. Lentisco 06:13, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Image Tagging Image:Michellegrattan2.jpg
 |
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Michellegrattan2.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified 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 media 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading 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, consider checking 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) 13:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Australia
Hi. I reverted you additions to the Australia page because, as true as they may be, i do not see how they are any more relevent to Australia than any other capitalist democracy, and were certainly not appropriate in the context of the sentence to which you added them. Just thought i would let you know why. Rockpocket (talk) 02:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- In case you haven't worked it out, the lead of a long article like Australia is supposed to summarise the rest, so your comments certainly don't belong in that part. Significant changes should be proposed on talk pages first, and seek consensus, providing references to published reputable sources to back up your concerns. --Scott Davis Talk 04:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Three-Revert Rule
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.--cj | talk 02:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- Your opinion on people being 'afterthoughts' is just that - opinion - until you can garner a consensus from other editors. I'm sure that a vast section of the Australian jurisprudential edifice would disagree with you on your point. The very fact that conflicting opinons exist make it an issue of POV, not an issue of fact. You are in violation of the three revert rule and if you revert again I will report you. Slac speak up! 02:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. abakharev 03:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Virginia Trioli
Please stop tagging this to be deleted. Trioli is a prominent and highly notable journalist, having won two Walkley Awards, the Australian equivalent of the Pulitzer Prize. Rebecca 04:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- You're wasting your time continually tagging the article. That process requires that the deletion be unopposed, and as it clearly is not, it'll be reverted until doomsday. If you want, you can nominate the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, in which case a vote will be held, but I guarantee it will be kept resoundingly. Rebecca 04:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
