User talk:Вasil/Archives/2007/June

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Thanks!

Thank you for the welcome to the AL project, Basil!  :) Aleta 17:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Rachel papers.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Rachel papers.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:TempestFilm.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:TempestFilm.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:58, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Sorry, it actually took me a minute to realize which edit that was......

I removed it mainly because it was the only one that I had found that utilized it in the infobox, and I'm trying to achieve some sort of consistency when I'm going through these. There hasn't been an official stance on it, but I think it's a pretty useless entry on a coach's infobox. After all, it's a program-specific piece of information, and if someone wanted to know the conference affiliation, they'd look for info on the program, not the coach. If you disagree though, I certainly wouldn't be offended if you brought it up on the WikiProject's talk page. --fuzzy510 03:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Hot debate going on at Template talk:Infobox NFL player

Appreciated your valuable input during the last flame up at Template talk:Infobox NFL player. I was hoping you would weigh in on the current one. — x a n d e r e r 21:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Maps

I've left a response for your question on my talk page. Thanks! Arkyan • (talk) 22:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you X 100

Thank you very much for supporting my RfA, which closed successfully yesterday... W00t! I hope to be a great admin (and editor) and I'm sure you can tell that my use of a large, boldfaced, capital "T" and a big checkmark image in this generic "thank you" template that I swiped from some other user's Talk Page that I totally mean business! If you need anything in the future or if you see that I've done something incorrectly, please come to my Talk Page and let me know. So now I've got a bunch of reading to do.... see you around! - eo 13:37, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Dauphin Island

Why have you removed so much from the Dauphin Island article ? Reading the comment you did about your change, it should be a small re-phrasing but it is actually a bit removal instead. May be a mistake ? --OC 15:13, 25 June 2007 (UTC)