User talk:J Milburn/archive5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Please do not edit it, it is for reference purposes only. If you wish to continue a discussion here, please do so on my talk page.

Contents

[edit] Biography

Hello, for i have recentely joined Wikipidia to attribute to, hereby the question what the reason was you marked my article "Gábor Tarján" as "not satisfy the notability guideline"? for i can correct the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Monsieurpinot (talk • contribs) 19:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Re:Re:Biography

Thanks for your input, am searching my sources already, regards!

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of ports in Greece

Thanks for your comments. I explained my actions in this regard on my RfA. ~ G1ggy! blah, blah, blah 23:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Illka Herkman

Sorry about that. I will be more carefull next time and try to add stub tags to less noteable articles. Bballoakie 17:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: St. stephen catholic school riverview, fl

I will look into the matter further, as it was last night, admins were deleteing School Entries like this one, as tagged with a7/a1. Bballoakie 17:50, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shutoff

I am stopping SmackBot. It is malfunctioning, and just created a page (Improduction) with only a Wikify tag. J Milburn 17:51, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, this was a recently deleted page, which should, nonetheless have not been edited. Rich Farmbrough, 17:57 3 May 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Aerosmith image

What is wrong with the current image used in the infobox for Aerosmith? It is a promo shot intended to be used to identify the band. Also, it shows the band's logo within the image, something very associated with the band. It also clearly identifies the members which make up Aerosmith, and you can clearly see all of them. But you're suggesting we use concert pics, which are often of low-quality and hard to capture all band members, or pasting together pics of the band?!?! Why are we lowering the bar here? This image has been up awhile and there never has seemed to be a problem, and I'm sure the band and their management is perfectly OK with the current picture, as it is well known within the Aerosmith community of this Wikipedia article, and nobody has ever said anything such that the picture is a violation or copyright infringement. Please...if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I don't think we're ever going to find a user image as high quality and all-encompassing as the current one. Abog 18:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

That fair use policy is only considered a "guideline". It is not set in stone, and there are many different viewpoints on the issue in the Wikipedia community. But if you want to put some shoddy image that Joe Blow took at an Aerosmith concert in the infobox, go ahead. I'm just trying to make sure that the content we use is of high quality here. I don't think there is a suitable replacement for the Aerosmith image, and if that's the case, than the image shall stay. Abog 18:27, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Manisha mepani

Please WP:SALT this article ... it has already been deleted twice today. --72.75.73.158 19:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shotocon Image

Three words: "don't embarrass yourself." No, seriously, don't... because you clearly have no clue about where this is headed. Firstly, the image only fails to meet the requirements of wikipedia because of technicality. I don't have the patience at the moment to dig through the endless edits of the past six months to make my case, but I do seem to recall someone explaining that the image was "typical" of the genre--as such the identity of the manga from which the cover was from was mostly of citational concern--a minor edit to the page would have restored that explanation. Secondly, I had a quick look at your contrib-list, and find it rather odd that you have made hundreds and hundreds of various little edits at such an awesome frequency, and yet you seem to have taken a rather curious interest in this one lowly topic to the extent that you even tracked down an old discussion entry that I had forgotten about... moreover, that all of this seems to have been done less than three weeks after becoming an admin. Normally, I would be tempted to attribute such a set of "activities" as being part of some vindictive or morally-extremist objective (which I've seen many like before), but I'm not in the mood for passing judgement against you or anyone else at the present time. I will reverse your edits and then I will make the appropriate changes where I am able, but you should understand that I won't easily bend to bureaucratic gimicks intended to influence the content of wikipedia according to either personal tastes or morals. I chose this image precisely because it was both an accurate and unoffensive depiction that illustrates the article's subject matter, and on that alone it has stood mostly unmolested for quite some time. And one more thing: it has been my understanding throughout the past two years of my own editing, that removing major elements and other potentially disruptive edits should be discussed first, not declared and then done. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sweetfreek (talk • contribs) 09:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC).

Before you dig your hole any deeper, I would advise you that (among other issues) it is unwise to claim "policy" alone as justification when your sole contention has been argued from "there is no dispute". Indeed there has been no significant dispute since your the first to bring up this subject for that image... yet you discuss it as though it has already been decided, and by whom I query? Now, if you wish to start a vote and get some additional opinions and facts to go on, be my guest as you would have my full blessing, but if you continue your present course of action on this matter you will only prove that I have been right all along. Sweetfreek 01:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
At the time when I first uploaed the image, I had only a fractional understanding of the fair use policy, that much I admit freely. However, since then I have become much more aquainted with the details of that policy, and I am 99% certain that my usage is both necessary and proper for the article. I have already made my case on the article's discussion page (which I would advise you to read). I am more than prepared to explain it and re-explain it, and even re-argue it if need be, but now we are at the point where further contentions and contraversies are only a waste of our time. Wikipedia is not a messageboard for opinions and debates, so I advise that we leave the matter and consider it as good as settled. Sweetfreek 20:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Need help regarding a deleted page

First, thanks for the Welcome you posted on my talk page, it does have me confused on one point. You state to add the helpme tag at the bottom of the question, but the tag generates a block that states to put it at the begining of the question, which is right? Now for my real question: Why was Routing Assets Database deleted? I originally came to Wikipedia trying to get information on "Routing Arbiter Data Base" (RADB) which lead me to the page "Routing Assets Database" After doing some additional reasearch I found that Routing Assets Database is more correctly abrevated RADb I created the additional redirect page RADb I also added some reference links to support the use of RADb and to beter explain it. Soumyasch has delete the page as "Blatant Advertising" but left both rediret pages in place. I strong disagree that anything on the page is "Blatant Advertising" If the Reference link is considered as such, then delete the link. Do NOT delete the entire page. Being new to Wikipedia I do not know how to proceed. I have looked at the dispute resolution process and find the instructions worthless in this situation as they read "Create a section for the RfC on the bottom of the article talk page with a brief, neutral statement of the issue." Since the page is deleted, and I can find no way of getting to it, how do you add anything to the bottom of the page? I did post the same request on Soumyasch talk page Please help Dbiel 08:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, if was very helpful. I appreciate also that Soumyach replied AND posted PART of the contents of the deleted page. What is strange to me is that the page was created by someone else months ago with numerous edits, then sat dormant for months, but when I started adding to it, then the notability issue came up. Any idea why that is the case? Also how would one go about getting the rest of the original page? Since it was created by someone else and I never made a copy of it, I have no way to recreate it. Thank you again for you reply and help. Dbiel 12:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for creating the work space for me. Is there any reason why the category list appears differently in the work space than in the original article? Dbiel 12:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your continuing replies. Sorry I did not notice your addition at the bottom of my talk page. I will definately take you up on your offer when it is documented. I will need you help at that time to edit the notibility references as they will be a bit "over the hill" Thanks again. Dbiel 13:02, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your continuing help Dbiel 00:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Could I ask you to take a look at the following article that is a spin off of RADB User:Dbiel/Rice_Allelopathy_Data_Base Thank you in advance. Dbiel 08:06, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to review the article and especially for all of the helpful comments. Dbiel 17:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

If you have the time or interest, could you review and comment on the following page still residing in my user namespace: User:Dbiel/RADB The page is what I would call a hybrid; part disambiguation page and part article page. Thank you for your past assistance. --Dbiel 02:40, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Estonian architect

WHAT ARE DOING??????? THIS SHOWS NO RESPECT IN ASKING ME FIRST. If you must know look at the List of Estonians under arhcitect and you will find him -I didn't put him there. Why dodn't you just prod template it rather than delete -god I can't stand users like you who delete what they want without consulting the creator first ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 11:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

And it is a list of "notable" estonians. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 11:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

And don't give me that about what is acceptable to wikipedia or not -do you think after all my editing I don't know about anything? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 11:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

OK sorry I didn't mean to snap. Give the article some time - if we can't find more info -there should in a library somewhere but if it is still a stub then delete it. I don't create articles which I don't think are worthy of a decent article eventually. Many of the other Estonian architects of the same period (e.g modern) have articles. I must admit that I don't usually create small stubs. Buu In future I'd appreciate discussing it with me first. All the best and thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 12:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

What I mean by "can't stand" is not personally against you - I know you do a great job on wikipedia and from what I can remember are a very decent user to speak to -what I mean is when people's work is removed without at least informing them I don't like it whoever it is. I bet you have a huge back log and there are many rubbish stub articles which need filtering. See ya ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Expecting you" Contribs 12:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] David Rabern

I may have missed something here, but I removed the speedy from this article. He looks very notable and encyclopedic to me. Take it to AfD if you aren't convinced, or tell me if I have missed something obvious. If you reply here, please notify me on my talk page. J Milburn 13:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I just figured that, as it was made by a group of three users who had also created lots of other articles about borderline things lately (some of which have also been deleted), combined with the fact that there are 9 Google results for "W. David Rabern", and also that it is recreation of deleted material (a few days after being deleted), that all those things kinda added up. Also, I looked at the references (at least the news ones). The BBC News one doesn't mention him by name once. The Guardian article goes a bit further, containing wording such as "Ayers positively identified Morales and Campbell and introduced me to David Rabern" and "This was odd. The CIA had no domestic jurisdiction and Morales was stationed in Laos in 1968.", but the Baltimore Chronicle article is basically just a rewording of the Guardian article: "Following that positive identification, Ayers introduced O’Sullivan to David Rabern" and "this report is rather odd, considering that the CIA has no jurisdiction on U.S. soil. Another bizarre fact: Morales was officially stationed in Laos in 1968". Google News only seems to have one real result for "David Rabern".
I won't revert you, of course, seeing as we're both established editors (you moreso than me), but I thought I'd give you my reasoning anyway. If you want to reply to this for any reason, feel free to do so here. I like to keep conversation in one place in general. --Dreaded Walrus 14:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
You make a good case- however, it would appear that there are some sources that are not on the 'net. It is a tough one, but I think certainly not speediable. If you think it should go, I reccomend you take it to AfD. J Milburn 15:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Outcast (fanzine)‎

Are you sure this isn't a possible speedy? It's just that it's been prodded before (and de-prodded by the creator) so it would have to go to AfD now, which seems a slight waste of time. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 16:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem, just wanted to check. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 16:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FUR

No problem, I do that for most of the nominees that come through since I don't want an article to sit in GAC for three weeks to a month and then be quick-failed for missing a single fair use rationale. I've had that happen to me a couple times. Anyway, good luck on the nomination, and happy editing! --Nehrams2020 22:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Baronet

Hi mate, I noticed your comment on the latest AfD about Baronets. I got a couple of questios, I am going to try and get a discussion going to try and discuss getting a policy for Barons and Baronets. Do you consider all Barons notable even the new one that dont get a seat in the house of lords, do you consider all Baronets notable even 2nd and subsequent ones and finally would you be happy for me to contact you if/when a discussion getys going on the subject? regards--Vintagekits 12:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Cool, all I would say is that you need to understand the vast difference between a Baron and a Baronet before you enter the discussion. Additonally if you feel that the policy on the notability of sportspeople is incorrect then you are more than welcome to address those issues also at the WP:N and WP:BIO talkpages.--Vintagekits 12:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
May I add that VK does not know what he is talking about. E.g. "Do you consider all Barons notable even the new one that dont get a seat in the house of lords". There are no new ones that don't get such a seat. - Kittybrewster (talk) 17:27, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Actually if a person inherts a Baron now he becomes a new Baron and does not get a seat in the house of lords - there it is correct to say "even the new ones that dont get a seat in the house of lords" - I dont expect an apology from a rude shameless self promotor.--Vintagekits 19:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Must you two always be bickering? Go and do it somewhere else, please. J Milburn 19:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lil Beats

This talk is about the "Lil beats" article. You said the "proper channels", can you give me a link to this Proper channel. I am willing to go throw these procedures. Please can you get back to me as soon as possible. talkpages.--Anison 13:50, 7 May 2007

[edit] Bradley Joseph FAC

Hello again J! I could use a favor, only if you find the time. I have self-nominated this article at FAC, and the only object in over a month is for copyedit/prose, even though three other people have copyedited it. A request is in to the League of Copyeditors but that can be a very slow process. I just thought I'd ask if you had any bit of time at all, if you could have a look at it for prose and copyedit as needed. If you're too busy I completely understand, but I think your musician-related work is excellent. Hope you're doing well. Cricket02 17:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I really appreciate the copyedit J. That was all that was needed because Tony1 is the resident expert in prose whose opinion I totally respect, so just really needed some new eyes on the article in hopes of satisfying the 1a criteria, so thanks very much, really appreciate your time here. If there is ever anything I can do for you, I'll be around.  :) Cricket02 20:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] HEEELP!!!

Jamild keeps making up these annoying user: things about me!!!!! Can you please lock that page?

[edit] Thanks

The Working Man's Barnstar
For never answering "no" the countless times that I asked you to update on my behalf WP:NPW/C/U, I award you this barnstar. Snowolf (talk) CON COI - 21:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SelketBot

Just came across this bot, and I realise that all people here about their bots sometimes is that they are malfunctioning. Well, I just wanted to say, I think it is an extremely useful and, hopefully, effective bot. As a user who occasionally edits from school, I know how frustrating it can be to be blocked. Nice work. J Milburn 21:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'm glad you find it useful. I must give most of the credit to Real96 who came up with the idea for the bot, I just wrote the code. --Selket Talk 00:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Calatayud

Honestly, I had JUST* started. I just wanted to save the page first! Way too premature to delete. Next time, maybe you should ask before deleting. A new editor, who did not know how to disambig, asked me to create the page so he would write the article. So, I did! Again, next time, ask first, delete later.--Charleenmerced Talk 16:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Well, I did put a disclaimer on the page alluding to the situation.--Charleenmerced Talk 17:20, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Again, the creation of the page was not for me. I usually do use my sandbox to create articles. THe creation of the page was for someone who did not know how to do it.--Charleenmerced Talk 17:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CafeFX

HEY STOP DELETING MY CAFEFX PAGE PLEASE...ITS A MAJOR MOTION PICTURE VISUAL EFFECTS COMPANY THAT NEEDS TO BE IN THE WIKI!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by crisp420 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Midnight Syndicate promo photo

Hi! Thanks for getting back to me about this image and educating me on fair use. I think I understand what you're saying. However, the image as it appears now is not just a photo (i.e., something anyone could have taken) since there are two images ghosted behind the band. Does that change your opinion on the matter? If not, I guess we could change to the band logo or that other image you referenced in your explanation. Please let me know what you think. Thanks! - Skinny McGee 13:33, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kakkat House

The way the article is written, the term house seems to be referring to a group. It even calls the term a family name. That would make it speediable under A7. DarkAudit 19:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ABUSE!

Hey buddy! Please delete the appropriate material here, (look at the last name)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Graham, and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Graham_%28asshole%29

[edit] WikiProject Trivium

Hi, just checked my talk page in between revision! Yeah, there should be a section for past members... The two past members written on the Trivium page, don't have valid citation. However, a quick search on google shows they were in the band!

I'll add the section to the wikiproject!

Asics talk Editor review! 10:17, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yup, it's an album cover question...

Hi there. I've read your specific page about this and it all seems fair enough... but you use AC/DC's page as a particular example of good image use (or lack of images). That page currently contains at least two non-free photographs (tagged as "promotional") and two album covers. Have they gone in there since you wrote your guidelines, or is that page thoroughly acceptable as it is? And if so, why is it? Not a complaint - just trying to understand all these rules, which seem very nebulous sometimes. I've been working hard on the Cradle of Filth pages so I want to make sure they're right. Cheers! Cardinal Wurzel 00:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and will you be visiting your wrath on Iron Maiden discography too? Cardinal Wurzel 00:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for that. Sounds like we were a particular priority! Eek! Cardinal Wurzel 16:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

So the in-line album covers on the main Cradle page are okay? Are there too many of them? Cardinal Wurzel 16:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Album covers

I got your message, I saw your "essay", and I saw that you want to delete all the Aerosmith album covers. OK, just cause a few bands don't have album covers, doesn't mean we need to get rid of them all now. I think you have sorely misunderstood Wikipdia's fair use policy. Why are album covers listed as an option to use to tag an image if all of the sudden we can't use them now?

I think I'm going to the top dogs on Wikipedia should this mass deleting of album covers take place. Never mind that album covers are fair to use under U.S. copyright laws. Never mind that they are low resolution. Never mind that they are the only legitimate, official images used to identify a product. Never mind trying to enhance Wikipedia through the use of images. I guess we'll just throw that all out the window now, right?

I am tired of people coming on to Wikipedia deleting every thing in sight...every article, every image. And if it continues, I will leave and I'm sure a lot of other good contributors will leave and you all can continue removing content until there is no more. Happy deleting! Abog 17:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, I now understand that you're not going to delete all album covers, but just from certain pages, so that the album covers aren't on so many pages.
I just don't understand the reasoning behind this crackdown all of the sudden. It was fine for years, and I don't know why everything's being changed now. Personally, I thought the gallery of album covers on discography pages was beneficial so that people would be able to pick out the album by its cover and go to its page, since not everyone is familiar with album titles (especially when it comes to untitled albums and the like). Is it really that excessive to have the album cover on a couple pages, both the album article and the discography article? I don't think so. How does removing an image from one article justify its use in another? It's still a fair use image on Wikipedia, no matter how many articles it is in. So, to me, either get rid of it completely, or let it be on multiple articles.
A discography is a collection of works, not words, and I think the articles should reflect that.
I'm just sensing that this sudden crackdown on fair use images isn't good for Wikipedia and does nothing to enhance it, does nothing to make it more free, doesn't really do anything but stir up trouble. Abog 02:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chelsea on the Main Page

As you can see from the discussion, win is just as grammatically correct as wins, and in fact more appropriate when discussing English football clubs. Please undo this change, as it hurts me to read it :-) and is an example of changing from British English to American English, which is specifically discouraged. Skittle 20:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Chelsea wins"

I'm an American myself, but I was almost certain that British English called for a team, which consists of multiple members, to be treated like multiple objects when preceding verbs. A quick look at Chelsea F.C. appears to corroborate that analysis. Can you explain why the part on the Main Page is an exception to this rule? -- tariqabjotu 20:11, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I think "Chelsea win" would be correct, but with it saying "Chelsea Football Club", it is more correct for it to say "wins".
As an Englishman, I think this is because "Chelsea", or "West Brom", or "Arsenal", or "Reading" could be considered as referring to the team, as a collection of players, while "Chelsea Football Club", or "Reading Football Club", e.t.c all seem to be referring to the club itself, as an entity, rather than the collection of players. So as it is the singular rather than the plural, it is "club wins", rather than "players win".
Have I explained that well enough? I sometimes aren't good at explaining things, that's all. --Dreaded Walrus t c 20:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I absolutely agree with Dreaded Walrus. I kinda knew that it was wrong on the main page, somehow, yet that I would personally say 'Chelsea win', and I like to think my spoken English is excellent. I think DW has explained why I think that. J Milburn 21:31, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Some Trivium Help Needed!

Well, I am a bit confused about this, someone Maurauth has tried to sort it, but has messed it up somehow. He attempted to move Trivium to trivium (education) and has, but the other page still remains. Also the Talk:Trivium redirects to Talk:Trivium (education). I uderstand what he was trying to do, although I still believe that Trivium (the band) are less notable than the eductaional term "trivium". However, I'll leave it up to you, as you are admin! Basically, I think a page and talk page needs deleting, andsomething might need moving! The delting will have no objections as the two Trivium (education) articles are identical in content, just ordered differently. I do not suggest moving Trivium (band) to Trivium howver, if you believe it may be useful then you could either do it, or put a debate up!
Shouldn't take too long, and I think I've probably made it sound more complicated than it is! Get back to me if you can't understand my gibberish! Asics talk Editor review! 15:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I suppose more people would search for the band! Thanks for sorting it out! Asics talk Editor review! 15:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alysser

Thanks, only reason I asked is that the author has created this article a few times prior to this and has been repeatedly warned not to do so. Wildthing61476 18:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Today's speedies

I took two of them to AfD, but I disagree with the high school page. It's not about the school, it's just some kid bragging about winning a football game. DarkAudit 19:22, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Ms. Grubb is claiming notability as a local politician in a town of ~6,700 people. Politicians from Atlantic City and Philadelphia rarely pass notability guidelines. Considering the lack of mention she has received outside of her home district, coupled with the lack of non-trivial Google or NewsLibrary results, I fail to see how she will even come close. DarkAudit 04:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 7 element of power

do not deleat this page. it has taken me a long time to make and i really need it up.I Know 7

[edit] Question

Hello!

I have a question regarding your concerns toward the article I posted earlier for "Terry Thoren." I have never written on wikipedia until today, and that is my first article so perhaps I missed something (I am not the person the article is about, if perhaps that was the problem). I looked at what is notable and acceptible, etc. and only posted things I found to be with cited external links. I have no issues altering the article, I just hope to get some clarification for a first timer...

Thanks!

[edit] David Gulotta

My bad, I thought if I slipped the stub tag in it would have given me enough chance to pull some references to notability, since he's quite easy to find online. I'll create the page again later when I have more time to do a more thorough job. Page creation isn't my forte! --otherlleft 15:33, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

  • About new page patrol: I do it a bit myself, and I'm curious what you, as a more experienced editor, do to quickly evaluate a page for notability. I don't want to get a rep for being too tough! --otherlleft 15:38, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Voddie Baucham

This man is one of the brightest people in North America. He has more education than most professors. He has started a global ministry as well as leading a church. He speaks all over the country to various types of groups. I think he is as notable as they come. Mullins421 02:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC) Voddie Baucham

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:With a million tear-stained memories.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:With a million tear-stained memories.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. 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. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 16:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Surrealism

Actually the image that you deleted from Surrealism (Yves Tanguy Indefinite Divisibility 1942) - [1] earlier today - seems to have a valid Fair use rationale. There was some vandalism on the copyright page. Take a look, please. I think the image is OK via fair-use. Please return it to the article. Thank you Modernist 17:53, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate your reply. As visual arts editors creating history of art articles these images are extremely important. I'll leave the Tanguy off for a while, I want to think about your comment - "the first piece of surrealism" for a while. Maybe we'll replace the Tanguy with something else. Thanks, enjoy your walk, it certainly is a nice day. Modernist 18:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] sorry

i am extremely sorry for putting nonsense on sina lari and i sincerely apologise to you. it is not good for me, as a member of parliament to do this. Kind regards

Rt.Hon David Turner P.S get a messageback to me as soon as possible

[edit] Lucas Giba

the article Lucas giba is clearly written by a fan of Inter Milan. You can check the article of Inter Milan to see if he is there is in the first team or youth team, which he is not. Or google it [2]. For any further proof, the number eight jersey is currently worn by Zlatan Ibrahimović. I hope you will reconsider the speedy deletion.--Agεθ020 (ΔT • ФC) 22:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Orgel

J MIlBURN

please leave me and my page alone and i do not have to listen to your comments+ i am older and wiser than you so you better listen to me more.

User talk:orgel

[edit] ORGEL

OK, i will not edit my talk page anymore and i also did not mean to offend you but i just get a little annoyed sometimes. I do live in Cumbria, not leece