User talk:FlyingToaster

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello!


Contents

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:L Ron Hubbard portrait.jpg)

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:L Ron Hubbard portrait.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 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.

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. BigDT 17:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Loiza flag.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Loiza flag.gif. 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. 21:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Letter To America

Letter To America has been proposed for deletion. An editor Awesimo 00:18, 9 March 2007 (UTC) felt this website might not yet be notable enough for an article. Please review Wikipedia:Notability (websites) for the relevant guidelines. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the "prod" notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod notice, the deletion process will stop, but if an editor is still not satisfied that it meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion for consensus. NickelShoe (Talk) 05:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

My opinion is that Letter To America is indeed notable enough for a Wikipedia article based upon the size of its audience (you can check the Frappr map on the "LTA website", nomination and competition in several high-profile blog competitions such as the Irish Blog Awards, and notoriety of its creator, Jett Loe. In short, I think LTA has earned its place and is continuing to grow. FlyingToaster 07:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


FlyingToaster 03:50, 2 April 2007

[edit] SIGBOVIK

As much as I want SIGBOVIK to live a thousand years, as its only mentions come from Livejournals at the moment, do you think that section should perhaps be removed until there is some attributable source for the conference? In my opinion it would make sense to leave it in the links at the bottom... Sirmob 06:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey Sirmob - I did attribute the "SIGBOVIK website" in the article. I'll assume you didn't see it, but if you did and don't feel this is enough please let me know. FlyingToaster 03:50, 2 April 2007
That's a self reference, obviously, even though I think I think it is reasonable to get away with leaving that link under external links. I gave a talk at SIGBOVIK today, it's not like I want to delete the information, but I think having the section on SIGBOVIK risks the page being deleted, which I also wouldn't want. And I suppose this is pretty close to a thing we made up in grad school one day, at least this time around :). Sirmob 07:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Indeed it is self-reference, and for SIGBOVIK I doubt anything better will surface. So, I'll leave it up to you whether to get rid of it or not. The sentence or two seems innocent enough, but if you feel it's approaching thing we made up in grad school one day deleteable level, please feel free to get rid of it.  :) FlyingToaster 07:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I sentence-ified the link reference at the end - and don't be so sure that "nothing better will surface," if we keep this up multiple years I suspect people will take note. And failing that, I suppose we could just talk to someone at The Tartan ;-) Sirmob 13:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)