User talk:Jamie runout

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Notability of Alexander tucker

A tag has been placed on Alexander tucker 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. tgies (talk) 12:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with Alexander tucker. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then please place {{hangon}} on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. ponyo (talk) 12:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Alexander Tucker.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Alexander Tucker.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 11:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Fuck buttons.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Fuck buttons.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 12:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of Fuck Buttons

The article Fuck Buttons has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. J Milburn (talk) 12:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fuck Buttons

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Fuck Buttons, 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. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. 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. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Fuck Buttons. Redfarmer (talk) 12:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

The recent edit you made to Deerhoof constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thanks. ScarianCall me Pat 13:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Speedy deletion of Fuck Buttons

A tag has been placed on Fuck Buttons requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ScarianCall me Pat 14:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Fuck Buttons

A tag has been placed on Fuck Buttons requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. KurtRaschke (talk) 05:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:Thren.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Thren.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 07:37, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to ATP Recordings. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your reference to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you. Mayalld (talk) 15:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Alexander Tucker

I have nominated Alexander Tucker, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander Tucker. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Mayalld (talk) 15:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, adding content of marginal relevance (unnecessary trivia) to articles, as you did to ATP Recordings, is not considered productive. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Mayalld (talk) 15:57, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

How is this relevant to the discussion of the Alexander Tucker page? Just because you don't consider something productive doesn't mean that you should repeatedly keep deleting a sourced, formatted table of information that is similar to many others on Wikipedia, and is considered by many to be notable. Jamie runout (talk) 16:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

It isn't. I'll ask if TW can be amended to fix this talk page issue. Mayalld (talk) 16:03, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
And you didn't answer my question regarding your repeated deletions, which constitute an abuse of admin power. It's no wonder your talk page is full of people angry at your deletion of their content because you don't consider it important or relevant. Some may say the same thing about the projects that you contribute to wikipedia. To you, articles on music may seem trivial. To me, articles on canals and scouting seem trivial, but that doesn't mean I assume they aren't useful to people interested in the subject and go around deleting them. Jamie runout (talk) 21:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
It's quite difficult to abuse admin power if you're not an admin (have a look at the list of admins). Any user can remove content, in the same way that any user can insert it. Your warning was inappropriate, and (in my view) a breach of the policy on civility - please address content, not contributors. GBT/C 21:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
My apologies, I should have rather said admin tools and warnings. Some people abuse them in a patronising fashion because they have done research on the minute specifics of wikipedia and enjoy being able to hold people over others who haven't. Mayalld seems determined to stop a page being published, and keeps reverting edits and deleting content even when his objections have been addressed and multiple people on the discussion page have stated that it is notable and that similar collections of information exist on many other wikipedia pages without removal or objection. Jamie runout (talk) 21:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
As I'm not an administrator, it is a mystery as to how I might have abused admin power!
I don't think articles on music are trivial. I do think that articles about musicians who have no coverage in mainstream media are non-notable, and policy supports me on that. I will feel free to submit such articles for consideration in the deletion process. As a non-admin, I won't be making the final decision (even if I were an admin, I couldn't make the final call on my own AfD)
I also think that a complete discography for a music publisher, consisting almost entirely of tracks that are not themselves notable is trivial. Please read WP:NOT for a list of things that Wikipedia is not.
To take up your research into my interests, adding a list of every bridge on a canal to an article would be trivial, and deletable.
Mayalld (talk) 21:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Let's look at your points. Scouting has no major coverage in mainstream media. Neither do canals. The majority of discussion is done in specialist places. As to your second point, there is no list of tracks, rather of full albums, and there are many many articles on albums on wikipedia. There are also many record labels who list their releases. Jamie runout (talk) 21:49, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
What nonsense! Both get coverage in mainstream reliable sources. Some parts of Scouting are notable, some are not (my own District would not be notable for example). In the same way some aspects of music are notable and others are not. Mayalld (talk) 21:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

(outdenting) Jamie, can I suggest you bear in mind that "other crap exists" is a line or reasoning that isn't given much, if any, weight on Wikipedia. Taking this particular example, you're not talking about the other record labels, or the other albums, but you're talking about this one. Mayalld's point appears to be that for this article about this publisher, the discography constitutes triviality. GBT/C 22:37, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Replaceable fair use Image:Alexander Tucker.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Alexander Tucker.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 14:12, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

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

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Fuck_buttons.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. Rettetast (talk) 11:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Fuck Buttons

I have nominated Fuck Buttons, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fuck Buttons. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Mayalld (talk) 13:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

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

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Thren.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. Mosmof (talk) 15:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)