User talk:FoekeNoppert

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fucké,

Why, thankyou for your lovely addition to my talk page, and I hope you're enjoying this little addition :P

XD

  • runs*

--Bwgames 00:33, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi mate,

I'm not sure that murder victims necessarily deserve their own entries, so Hans Gruyters seems notable, but maybe his victim J. van Dieten isn't, unless he was also notable in another way. I moved your thing about yourself to your user page, since this is your talk page :) Dunc_Harris|☺ 12:40, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'll give you the welcome text as well:


Welcome!

Hello, FoekeNoppert, 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! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Thanks for the head's up - I only added it because we recently had a history assignment where we were given a victim's name and then had to look up the case in question, which is easier to do if the name is in the encyclopedia. I realize it's a bit of a waste of space, though...

)

- Foeke -

Contents

[edit] Alfred van Cock

Alfred van Cock: can you help to verify? Mikkalai 17:28, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Potato, Potarto, Nilsen, Nielsen, let's call the whole thing ooooff...

Just to let you know that I've just moved information about the serial killer from Dennis Nielsen to Dennis Nilsen because the latter spelling gets over twice as many google hits as the former, and it's easier then to allay confusion with North Carolina politician Dennis Nielsen. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 13:30, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It's also the correct spelling - see 'Killing for Company'.Dbiv 00:30, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Redirects

BTW, no space between the # sign and the word "REDIRECT". -- user:zanimum

[edit] Geoffrey Lawrence

The 'Geoffrey Lawrence QC' who defended Dr Bodkin Adams was not Geoffrey Lawrence, 1st Baron Oaksey. He was Hon. Sir Frederick Geoffrey Lawrence (1902-67) who went on to be a High Court Judge and Chairman of the National Incomes Commission.Dbiv 00:30, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Please tag

Hi. Please tag as GFDL by placing "{{GFDL}}" on the image description page. — David Remahl 14:08, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] eerste nl.wikimedia.org ontmoeting

ik zou iedereen graag willen uitnodigen te overwegen of zij een rol willen en/of kunnen spelen in de oprichting van een nederlandse wikimedia-organisatie. een eerste ontmoeting wordt momenteel georganiseerd, zie daarvoor hier, op de nl.wikimedia.org wiki. er zijn nog vele stappen te nemen, en meer wikianen nodig, om e.e.a. op verantwoorde wijze verder te ontwikkelen. Radiant_>|< 10:49, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Allochtoon

Hello Foeke,

Thanks for correcting the typing error (het -> her) in Allochtoon. I hope you do not mind my having put back the word "commoner" to describe Pieter van Vollenhoven; my point being that in Margriet's case, she did not marry a foreigner (where most candidates would typically be either from the nobility or from the gentry), but a Dutchman, and a "commoner" at that. The word here, of course, is a noun.

Should you feel strongly about this, of course feel free to eliminate the word again. I think it is apt, but it's not worth an edit war to me! Regards, Bessel Dekker 15:03, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Natgeologo.gif

Hello FoekeNoppert, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Natgeologo.gif) was found at the following location: User:FoekeNoppert. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Jennifer ehle and colin firth.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Jennifer ehle and colin firth.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes 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 non-free media 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. After Midnight 0001 01:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] United Nations Parliamentary Assembly

Here is an article on a proposed new UN body similar to the European Parliament. Please vote at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/United Nations Parliamentary Assembly. Thanks, Sarsaparilla (talk) 21:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Joan wolfe's body.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Joan wolfe's body.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Midsomer_murders_logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Midsomer_murders_logo.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. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, 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. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 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 non-free media 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. Project FMF (talk) 20:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Blonde Dolly

A tag has been placed on Blonde Dolly requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mdsummermsw (talk) 19:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blonde Dolly

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Blonde Dolly, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Mdsummermsw (talk) 21:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)