User talk:Humansdorpie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia, the greatest encyclopedia on Earth! You seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics!

You may wish to review the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, as well as the avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages.

Here are some helpful links:

By the way, an important tip: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments.

Hope to see you around the Wiki! If you have any questions whatsoever, feel free to contact me on my talk page!

∞Who?¿? 11:28, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ndebele

Hi,

Thanks for your work on the Ndebele article. I was wondering, are the Ndebele of South Africa and the Ndebele of Zimbabwe the same people? If so, they should be in the same article. --Hottenot

[edit] Rhodesia

Thanks for clarifying the article on the Rhodesian Dollar. I didn't have too much to go on when I created it. --Expatkiwi

[edit] South African Farmer Murders

Wow, you really took a hatchet to farm murders. I agree with you, but I think you might be a bit POV yourself there, though. Remember, NPOV means seeing the other guy's point of view as well, even when he is so patently wrong ;-> If you look at South African Farmer Murders, you might find some interesting sources on the discussion page, and some interesting discussion as well. --Slashme 06:02, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your message,Slashme - you're right, I probably was a bit intolerant on this occasion. I know the South African Farmer Murders page, and I firmly believe that this subject is worthy of an article. However, something with such emotional power needs to be carefully researched and dispassionately presented - that does not appear to have been done either for the articles or for the web sites. The farm murders article contained a range of claims - all unsubstantiated, some simply not true - ranging from the South African government does not publish crime statistics to in most cases victims are tortured and women raped. My feeling is that if the truth of these serious claims is doubtful, they should not be included. Best wishes, Humansdorpie 10:09, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I absolutely agree with you. I think you should really take out most of the dead wood, in both of those articles. I'm not the guy to take on those articles, and I know it's a helluva mission, but maybe we can get somewhere. Maybe sometime this weekend we can pare them down, and generate a compromise page by discussing with the good ol' boys. --Slashme 20:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

There is a proposal to rename the article. Could you please give your input at Talk:South African Farmer Murders#Proposed page move to South African farm attacks? Zunaid 08:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LOL

I don't think I've ever been patronised quite so charmingly! Humansdorpie 00:56, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello Humansdorpie,

To wrap up the conversation, the first directive of Wikipedia is BE BOLD. All official policies are subservient to that rubric. And now, all of my articles are on watch-lists so I know when the censors are doing their often misguided work. I often win arguments for deletions, when I know about them. I win them consistently when I'm dealing with writers trained in deliberation. You might chose to be sporting and email the article's author when you decide to remove work. It's an opportunity for personal growth.

Lulu Cameron will be added again to the collection --- stronger, more precise. Maybe it'll be clear to you where she stands in late 20th century art this time around. Too bad you can't see her work. Maybe I'll post some.

I am available to assist you in your art education with many suggestions for worthwhile activities. This weekend will surely see one or two art openings where - ever you live. Let me know if attending a few galleries opens up any insights for you.

Sincerely,

Will Juntunen

received by e-mail 7/12/05; Wikified by Humansdorpie 00:56, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Farm Murders Article Collaboration

Hello Humansdorpie,

I'm very enthusiastic about collaborating in re-writing the South African Farm Murders article. I'm going to start by centralising my facts, and then writing out a draft layout (in accordance to accepted Wiki formats), and then perhaps we can both start adding to that as the central article? Or perhaps you have a layout and structure you'd prefer to use?

Looking forward to working with you on this,


Ssteedman 06:01, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I will be delighted to follow your lead; the more research I do into it, the more I think there is a dissertation on the subject - in particular, the response of the media and special interest groups - just waiting to be written! Humansdorpie 17:16, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Thanks for maintaining Deletion sorting/Africa. I didn't know of that page and I've put in on my watchlist immediately. Especially in this area, such a page is very important to make specialists aware of AfD votings. — mark ✎ 11:22, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Graag gedaan; I noticed someone - I think it was Capitalistroadster - maintaining the Oz equivalent, and just decided to do the same for Africa.I hope gradually other specialists will become aware of the page. Het beste, Humansdorpie 16:07, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Moving articles on afd

If you move an article that's on afd, please make sure that it still points at the discussion instead of a redlink; this helps the discussion be found if you stumble across the article (or actually wrote it), instead of just reading afd. You can do this either by making a redirect (as I've done at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cuisine of Namibia), or by editing the link in the afd notice. —Cryptic (talk) 15:42, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your message - it's kind of you to fix it, and thanks for pointing me to the correct way to do it. Humansdorpie 23:53, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles For Deletion

Hi, one or both of the following situations applies to you, and you may therefore be interested in related discussions.

You may also be interested in a discussion of whether or not the entire text of a whole bible chapter should be contained in the 6 articles concerning those specific chapters, and whether or not they should only use the translations favoured by fundamentalists. This is being discussed at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Whole bible chapter text.

--Victim of signature fascism | Don't forget to vote in the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee elections 17:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Harare-jameson-ave-c1960.jpg

You uploaded this some time ago, but it has no confirmed source or copyright info. It is likely to be delted soo. Do you still have access to the orgiinal postcard? if so, could you indiocate if the publisher or prier if not the photog is credited, adn mention any such info on the imge page? that mighjt be enough to support {{Non-free fair use in}} for this image. DES (talk) 00:15, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Please be careful in the labelling of your uploaded images; you cannot claim GFDL on scans you make of old photos and postcards. Thanks.--Pharos 14:26, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed merge of Token (numismatics) and Token coins

I've just replaced the merge tag on Token coins. The two articles seem essentially to duplicate information, and it would be helpful to get feedback from other users regarding the proposed merge. Humansdorpie 14:27, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Merged into Token coins, redirect at Token (numismatics). I got the obivious stuff megerd and assimilated together, but I'm sure there is still alittle redudnant stuffs. Thnx Humansdorpie :) Joe I 01:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I'm lost!

Howdy. I'm picking through the history of Nguni (trying to sort out a circular link), and I kind of lose the thread at your edit of 10 Dec 05 [1]. The edit summary says: "removed duplication/internal contradiction": do you happen to remember where the material was duplicated? I'm a bit lost... Many thanks, JackyR 18:26, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Hallo JackyR, thanks for your message. I'm scratching my head, trying to remember - I think I got rid of information that is duplicated on other pages - e.g. the social structure of the Xhosa and Zulu peoples - and tried to give an overview of the broad history and social structure of Nguni people. It looks as though I also tried to resolve confusion resulting from the statement that Nguni is an artificial term, which suggests an ethnic unit, which it is not, when in fact many academics (and the article) do nowadays use "Nguni" to describe a specific ethnic group. Hope this is helpful - please let me know if I can help further - Humansdorpie 19:04, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Ah, that's progress. Yeh, I think some of this is plain wrong, as does ZyXoas (on my talk page - posting from a mobile phone, can you believe - but reading replies on his own Talk). I think there may be another go at re-writing this. You know, what we really need is a secondary school history book – maybe a BoLeSwa one or a new South African one. You don't have such to hand do you?
I don't, unfortunately. I've just been flicking through current (2006) UNISA History lectures on Turmoil and Transformation in the Southern African Interior, though. They use Nguni and northern Nguni very matter-of-factly throughout to refer to ethnic groups. Elizabeth Isichei, writing in 1997, [2] makes the points that (a) the word has changed meaning over the last 400 years, and (b) that no ethnic group in present-day South Africa considers itself Nguni - I think her view is that its use is faintly Eurocentric [3]. Isichei compromises by using 'Nguni' in quotation marks as shorthand to describe "African peoples who live east of the Drakensbergs and south of the Tsonga of Mozambique" and their languages. "So-called", in other words... but I think the article already makes that point. Humansdorpie 20:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh. Because Zimbabwean Ndebele friends assure me they are Nguni, as do Chichewa-speaking friends in Malawi. Perhaps this is a SAfrican thing. I get the impression that, in reaction to the way ethnic identification was (ab)used in the past, SA is in flight from some terms which are happily used as self-descriptors elsewhere on the continent. There's a discussion about just this at bantu. Or I might just be wrong... But yes, the article should reflect the different sensibilities on this.

Actually, I've just copied the last two §s to Talk:Nguni, cos this is getting important for the article. JackyR 21:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Taylor Lea Thomas

Just wanted to drop you a note to let you know that the article on Taylor Lea Thomas has undergone significant changes and will continue to improve with time. I appreciate you reading the article in the first place. We are trying all we can to make the article better suited for Wikipedia because Ms. Thomas has accomplished a lot and has received many awards and press for it and therefore, appropriate for this medium. I hope that you will soon see this for yourself and opt instead to keep the article. Thank you kindly. Peter Sanders 14:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Image Tagging Image:Muzorewa-UANC-1979.jpg

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Muzorewa-UANC-1979.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 {{Non-free fair use in|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) 23:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks; I've added a GFDL tag and rationale for the image's use under fair use Humansdorpie 09:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Madam and Eve

Hi there,

Just wondering if there was any specific reason why you removed the reference to Madam and Eve from the Sitcom page? Humansdorpie 19:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

From what I can tell, it's not a sitcom. It's a comic strip. A sitcom (as defined in Wikipedia and also in my experience) is either a radio or television show.


[edit] Interster

Hi,

Thanks for directions on how to navigate this site; obviously I am a novice at it and hope I get it right this time. I am a librarian assisting a library patron. The patron wants more information on Interster other than what appears here on Wikipedia. They asked how to get in touch with the author of the article. Any assistance you are able to offer is appreciated. Ann

  • You're doing very well so far, Ann! I'm afraid I know nothing about the subject - I just cut and pasted the information from the article Television in South Africa, because I felt it deserved its own article. Looking at the History page of TV in SA (if you click the History tab it will give you all the older versions in a chronological list - you can click on each version to establish who made which changes) it appears that the original Interster contribution was made by User: Quiensabe. If your customer has specific questions about the series, my advice is to go to the Talk:Interster discussion page and leave the question(s) there (just click the edit tab and add the questions as before) and wait for people to respond. Humansdorpie 09:10, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your help!

[edit] Judaism in SA

Hey, thanks for the message :) I didn't think to look there. Cool, I've added South African Jews to the Religion in South Africa category. Joziboy 13 April 2006, 13:34 (UTC)

[edit] Anglo African

Thanks for helping with tidying up of this page. It looks so much better than when I stumbled on it for being up for deletion. Joziboy 17 April 2006, 13:19 (UTC)

  • Pleasure - a bit better stuck together now. Humansdorpie 10:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Carlos Cardoso, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 07:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Suicide in Rhodesia

Humansdorpie. You ask me to provide a reference for the following item that I inserted in the Rhodesia article early in 2006 :

The most common cause of death amongst this group while in Rhodesian service was suicide.

The item is based on my recollection from the time. Rhodesia attracted quite a few odd-ball people and the suicide statistic was a matter of common discussion. Leave it with me for a few days. If I cannot come up with a credible written source then I will remove or qualify the item. Bob BScar23625 20:10, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Great - ta. Humansdorpie 23:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crowlington Grammar School

  • Thanks for the comment you left for me regarding Crowlington Grammar School, my nomination of it for AfD, and that it might be a hoax. I wasn't aware of that. Must be spideysense I didn't know I had. Personally, I don't subscribe to the theory that all schools are somehow notable, and you provided me with a reason not to accept things blindly. Fluit 23:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio guy

Heh, that's usually the case when you see a new article that isn't wikified. I believe portions of Ndebele music are also copyvio as well. To top that off, I couldn't find any Google hits for Obediah Mlilo, so I've decided to AfD it. Let me know if you've heard of him. —Khoikhoi 19:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I know what you mean. ;) Actually, I like the article and I don't really want to AfD it. We'll let this one fly. —Khoikhoi 23:11, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi there. I've been doing a bit of lurking on Wikipedia when I came across articles linked to from the dab Ndebele. I was just wondering were you get the idea of distinct groups and languages. Personally, the language used on the isiNdebele SABC news broadcast sounds like isiZulu with mispronounced clicks and extra r and rh sounds. Yet your articles say that this is the language spoken in Zimbabwe and the South African version sounds more like siSwati - I don't think so. Care to elaborate? Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 17:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Hallo Zyxoas. Well, it isn't disputed that there are three groups of people who all call themselves Ndebele. One lives in Zimbabwe, and is descended from 19th century Zulu settlers; they speak a language which most linguists seem to agree is basically Zulu. The second group has lived in the region around Pretoria/Bronkhorstspruit since the 1600s - they speak the language that I think you are describing; you'll hear it on Ikwekwezi FM. The third group is closely related to the second, lives in Limpopo Province and generally speaks Northern Sotho.
I don't know about the Swati connection - I didn't make that edit. However, I imagine the editor's point isn't necessarily that the Southern Ndebele language sounds like Swati, but that it shares some plural forms with Swati. Best wishes, Humansdorpie 13:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gregory Lauder-Frost

I have read your smart-alec comment on vandal User:Edchilvers Talk Page. I share a common interest with Lauder-Frost (and millions of others) in genealogy. It is, after pornography, the largest hobby in the world. Asd my family come from East Anglia I found his article of great interest and I used it as one of my sources. For goodness sake, that does not make him me! I live in Lewes. He lives in Berwickshire! If you don't like him or his previously excellent political biography then please do delete it. But don't carry on with this silly conspiracy theory rubbish. Sussexman 21:01, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, Gregory; not really interested. Please try not to be personally abusive. Humansdorpie 15:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC).

I read you stupid comment on the Talp Page of HOTR. I am not GLF. Here is my response: Another conspiracy theorist. Countless people in Britain have relations and family in Australia, just as they have in the USA. My family had two large properties out there, which I visited several times in my youth. The districts are not "funny little places" but rich with local history. I have no idea who Christchurch is but can he not be have an interest in similar areas/subjects? What are you trying to prove here? Sussexman 07:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, Gregory; not really interested. Please try not to be personally abusive. Humansdorpie 08:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC).

Your very deliberate and evil intentional insertion of the Gregory Lauder-Frost court case is illegal as it could affect his family, his children, his friends, his livelihood etc., today. He is covered, guilty or not, under the RofO Act, and you are wrong. Resident in Scotland he is also covered UK-wide (and under international conventions re Internet publications) under the law of Convicium. You have clearly demonstrated that you have malice towards him, which is what this law is all about - protection from the smearers. You have deliberately chosen to flout the law because you think you are very clever. You are not. Believe me. Is this a threat? Yes, it certainly is. You'd better believe it. Lets hope that you have heard of discovery. Lastly, the notice in the London Gazette referred to a Scottish Sequestration, the only avenue available to him because his assets had been frozen. Appointing a Trustee released them. There was no bankruptcy in England and Wales (a separate jurisdiction in such matters) and in any case it was discharged accordingly. Raising here, today is sheer malice. The name is David, and I am sick of people emailing me about this. Anyway, stand by. You are not immune from prosecution in this matter. I will be happy to act for GLF and we will locate you. 213.122.46.228 20:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Dear Gregory, I don't believe we have met, but we share the common acquaintance of a number of people. Thank you for your messages. I am a little surprised by their vehemence, though, and by the threats of legal action. I feel you might be overreacting:

  • I don't believe that the GLF article was a good article. That's personal opinion, of course, mainly on stylistic grounds - it should be about your achievements rather than about dinners you have attended or letters or articles you have written.
  • I don't actually believe that you are notable enough for a Wikipedia article. That's also personal opinion, and obviously you and others disagree. That's OK - that's what AfD discussions are for.
  • I strongly believe it seriously undermines the usefulness, stature and neutrality of Wikipedia for editors to
  • a) write and edit directly autobiographical articles
  • b) edit and post comments under a variety of user names and anon ISPs
  • Wikipedia is supposed to be a neutral work of reference. I believe this means that it is valid for a biographical article to include information such as the fact that, at the zenith of his or her influence within a political movement, the subject was convicted of something. Wikipedia states that this should be handled with sensitivity - perhaps you feel that I was not adequately sensitive, and if that is the case then from the heart I sincerely and honestly apologise. However, I do feel very strongly that if the article is not deleted, a comprehensive, neutral and verifiable account of what happened in 1992-1994 needs to be included. There is probably a further discussion to be had regarding the precise details, since the information you have provided does not appear to accord with the information the Royal Courts of Justice record office publishes to the public.

I edited the Gregory Lauder-Frost article for the first time three days ago. I am editing the article to create a better, more even-handed, informative and transparent article, not out of some sort of unmotivated, malign intent towards someone whom I have never met. View my edit history; you can see every edit I have ever made and every message I have ever sent another user. Of course I publish information about editors I identify who use different accounts to deliberately obfuscate genuine discussion, or to edit articles with less than total transparency: your interactions with Edchilvers form a case in point. Regardless of political orientation, he is a brand-new editor making excellent contributions, and I believe you do him a real disservice by not permitting him to have the opportunity of honest and honourable debate with you.

If there are any specific points about the content of the article that you would like to discuss, then please go ahead. I suppose it would be sensible to wait for the results of the AfD. I'm not sure how easy it is for you to get back to this page (dynamic ISP and all), so I will also post this message on my Talk page. Humansdorpie 23:22, 7 June 2006 (UTC).

  • You are breaking both English and Scottish law, pure and simple. It may interest you to know that the Lists at the RCJ are printed at the beginning of the week and those are the ones available on the net. Other motions and 24-hour-notice hearings are simply written onto the sheets. Defendants and their teams must agree to be called at short notice for the latter hearings otherwise they must wait their turn in the queue. My personal view is that you are being very deliberatly malicious in this matter, as whether guilty or innocent, the matter was entirely unrelated to his political profile and is long buried, and he is now protected by law from publication of same. Your not so subtle attempts to portray yourself as reasonable and objective (above) are betrayed by your many statements and actions. Lightoftheworld 10:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Given the manner in which this User has deliberately provoked me and others with sneering remarks and accusations of impersonation it is a wonder that people have not been more robust in a response. Sussexman 15:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lovely to hear from you

How wonderful to make contact with you again after so many years, Yolanda. Do you still own the tattoo parlour in Surinam? Bunty and Mr Eugenides are off to Prague tomorrow, so I will call Mummy and see if she can arrange for Ruprecht to meet them there. Do keep in touch - I'll be at the hot-dog stand in Wagga-Wagga on Tuesday as usual. Fat Agatha and Edwin the Opera-Singing Dog send their regards. Humansdorpie 15:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Leaving

Sorry to hear you're leaving. I've not known you much, only coming into contact with you through this GLF stupidity, but it's always sad - and more worrying than I can say - to see someone bullied off the wiki. We are becoming way too blasé about this shit, in my opinion. --Sam Blanning(talk) 21:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oh no!

Very, very sad that you're leaving. Wikipedia will not be a better place for your departure. If, after a bit of a break, you do come back, I for one will be delighted to see you. Who knows, I might even get round to fixing some of those articles we've talked about :-) JackyR | Talk 01:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Remove

If this fellow has permanently departed, as he says, then surely his pages should eb taken down. 81.131.3.209 09:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Black Cap (London pub)

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Black Cap (London pub), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Black Cap (London pub). You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 00:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Morgan-MDC.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Morgan-MDC.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. 10:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:BECM-gallery.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:BECM-gallery.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. MER-C 08:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Humphrey-gibbs-c1965.jpg

I have tagged Image:Humphrey-gibbs-c1965.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Rettetast 19:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:RLI-troopie.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:RLI-troopie.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. 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 {{non-free fair use in|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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:13, 22 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 12:13, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:RLI-troopie.jpg

I have tagged Image:RLI-troopie.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 12:13, 22 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Ngoni-c1958.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ngoni-c1958.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) 23:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Rho-one-pound-note.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rho-one-pound-note.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) 04:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image source problem with Image:Clifford-dupont-c1972.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Clifford-dupont-c1972.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. 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:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rossrs (talk) 11:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)