User talk:Rob77

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Rob77, 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!

Also, welcome to WikiProject Cricket! DaGizza^Chat ^(c) 04:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cricket articles

Hi Rob. Welcome to WP:Cricket. I thought you may be interested to know that we already have articles (at least of stub size) on all English Test cricketers. See List of English Test cricketers. Also the name format that we use for international cricketers tends to be that used on List of international cricketers. Of course, all of these articles could be improved - indeed your A.M. Smith has more info in it than Mike Smith (1967-) and hopefully that info can be merged into it. Finally, please provide a reference for the edits you make - it's just so they can be checked easily and amendments make if you do happen to make an inadvertent error.

Good luck, welcome on board, and happy editing! jguk 08:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biography merges

Done. --Paul 06:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3 hundreds in 3 matches

Hi Rob. As you are a bit of a trivia geek you may like to know a couple of other English batsmen have in fact scored centuries in 3 successive test since Allan Lamb did it. Chris Broad managed 3 in 3 downunder and most recently (until today) Graham Gooch during his purple patch in fact managed 4 centuries in 3 matches. I was listening to 5 Live just before your edit of the Ian Bell article - oddly enough they said it was the first time since Lamb did it but Gooch - who is currently commentating -was there to correct them! --LiamE 13:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jonathan Isaby

I've noticed that you've twice added that Isaby had a 'penchant for candles' during his days at York, and I'm wondering how you know this. Assuming that you were born in 1977 (hence the username), I realise that you may well have been a class-/flat-/general mate of his. However, such trivial information really isn't worth adding if it isn't referenced. I could ask Jonathan if his time at York was best characterised by suits and candles, but I'm sure that he'd appreciate his article being more about his rapid rise to importance within both the media and the extra-party structure of the Conservative Party. Bastin 15:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Runaway Bride

What's the exact url you got it from? Press packets are not released to the general public, they are usually only released to press through password protected routes. Secondly, publicity photographs do not usually have the bbc.co.uk/doctor who URL marked on them, so colour me skeptical. Can you produce the license terms on which the BBC has released these pictures? --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 15:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, found it. This is where you got it from. And it's obvious because the file name is even the same: http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/gallery/2006_x/800/doctor_donna2.jpg - the 800x600 resolution one. And let me draw your attention to the little box at the bottom of the page that says: THE BBC MAKES THESE IMAGES AVAILABLE ONLY AS DESKTOP WALLPAPER FOR YOUR PC. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 16:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

My sentence was unclear. The box is at the bottom of This specific page. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 16:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Because those are indeed publicity shots and/or screenshots, not desktop pictures provided for that specific purpose and licensing provisions. You can't just assume and drag stuff off and put them up if there exist specific provisions for their use. In fact, some of those shots you mention are probably also in violation of licensing and should be replaced. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 16:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Copyright laws apply internationally; both the US and UK are signatories to the Berne Convention. You can look it up. Go check the UK CDPA for what constitutes fair dealing, or the US copyright laws (USC 18, IIRC) of fair use; commercial impact is only one factor, and not the deciding one: see the US Supreme Court decision of Acuff-Rose, among others. (And just as a point of information, that Cyberman picture was cropped from an actual picture released by the BBC specifically for promotional purposes, not a desktop picture as in the doctor_donna2.jpg image.) In any case, I don't propose to lecture you on IP law, nor do I want to get involved in a larger conversation about copyrighted pictures on Wikipedia in general which is being whacked out on and on at WP:FUC among others. I merely point out that using that particular desktop picture in that manner was not permissible. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 17:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Rob. I'm afraid that Khaosworks is right: that particular image can't be used on Wikipedia, because the BBC's licensing agreement on the wallpaper page says that it's released solely for use as wallpaper. I was able to fix the Sarah Jane Adventures image because that did come, ultimately, from BBC Picture Publicity: it's a different branch of the BBC, which releases images for press use. I conversed with Shaun Lyon at Outpost Gallifrey to confirm that: he's got a password at BBC Pictures, and that's where the copy on the OG News Page came from. Legally speaking, it's a big difference. Sorry. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

As an afterthought: if you can make a screenshot from the BBC Christmas programming TV ad, we could use that in the article. If you can do that, upload the image and let me know; I'll fix up the licensing and fair use rationale to the best of my ability, and then we can put it on the article page. Good luck! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

That's more worthy of the {{tv-screenshot}} tag, since it's actually a screenshot. That being said, it'll probably be replaced once a proper wide-screen screenshot is taken from the actual special when broadcast. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 15:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I've put the appropriate fair use rationale on your image, Rob, but by the time I got around to it someone else had uploaded another image. I'm not sure of the source of that one — if it doesn't last, you should be able to put yours up and it should be kosher to remain, at least until we've got a proper screenshot from the programme itself. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dave Johnston (police officer)

A tag has been placed on Dave Johnston (police officer), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, 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 Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out 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. (aeropagitica) 23:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

With the utmost respect- being head of Scotland yards murder squad is a mark of notability...... rob77 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob77 (talk • contribs)

Firstly, please sign your comments with four tildes, ~~~~, as this makes it easier for editors to respond to you. Secondly, the comment was directed towards the biography-as-presented, rather than to the individual. It may be that this police officer is notable for achievements that have been recorded in reliable sources. If so, they should be presented in the article in order to be useful to researchers. An officer can lead an investigation and not be notable except in the context of the investigation. In that case, the biographical comments could be limited to the article on the investigation. If the officer has received a string of commendations for investigations, bravery, etc then there may be more of a case for an article. Refer to WP:BIO for details. (aeropagitica) 16:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello! I would just like to say that this article is now looking at lot better than the sub-stub that I originally deleted. I would like to know if you have a source or reference for this information that you added to the article. These are high-profile cases and a source linking Cmr Johnston to the investigations would be a really good thing for the article to include. Regards, (aeropagitica) 01:05, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Commander David Johnston

Hiya, I was wondering as you put a lot of bio info in for a couple of the coppers on the Suffolk Murder investigation, if you could set up an article for the guy above who is head of the Scotaldn yard murder squad and who has advised Suffolk Police. I started one but it was deled! Ta, rob77

I've recreated it for you - so please expand asap. Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! (Whisper...) 17:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I've started to re-do it - ahve anything to add? Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...) 08:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:DavejohnstonPA 228x342.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:DavejohnstonPA 228x342.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:06, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to the AMA!

Hello Rob77, I see that you have decided to join the AMA. I'll be the first to say welcome! We're always in need of more advocates, especially since were backlogged most of the time. Just a few pointers for what we do. We communicate by putting a template on our talk page. The template is {{AMA alerts}}. The AMA also has it's own IRC channel, which reports new cases and alerts to us. It can also be used as a place to ask for advice on an issue. If you'd like to jump right into a case, you are free to check out AMA Requests for Assistance, which is our new request for advocacy system. The instructions for how the technical part works is on it's talk page. You can also use the AMA userboxes that appear under here. If you have anymore questions about the organization, just ping any advocates talk page, including our coordinator Steve Caruso, or deputy coordinator Wikiwoohoo. Again, welcome to the AMA! We currently have a meeting in progress here, to which you're welcome to contribute. Can I suggest that you resolve your current dispute with khaosworks before taking any cases - it should make things easier for you. Also, in the current meeting, we're deciding on some processes for newer editors who'd like to become advocates, and you'd probably fall into this "class" were the rules in effect (they aren't yet!). To this end, I'd like to offer my help to you on your first (few) cases, just to look over what you're doing and help you with policy when/if you need it. Thanks, M a rtinp23 19:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AMA Request accepted

Your request for assistance has been accepted. I have left some questions there that I would like you to answer there. Thank you. --ŞρІϊţ ۞ ĨήƒϊήίтҰ ^{(тąιк|соήтяївѕ)} 22:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC) Maybe you missed my previous message..? Please respond. --ŞρІϊţ ۞ ĨήƒϊήίтҰ ^{(тąιк|соήтяївѕ)} 03:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ian Levine

Hi Josiah- I'm a touch concerned about the entry on Ian Levine's bio about his comparison to the Abzorbaloff thing. Even if critics have speculated about it- is this really needed on a biographical page? Rob 18:02, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I understand your concern, and if it were just fan sources, I'd agree, but I think that the mention in the Guardian article about Take That [1] makes it pass the test at WP:BLP#Reliable sources — just. However, I agree that it's a marginal case, and if you want to raise it at Talk:Ian Levine I'll support whatever consensus is reached there. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Will do I think- far too much like personal sniping for my liking. Rob 20:16, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Gen richard dannatt 150x200.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gen richard dannatt 150x200.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

[edit] Image:Gen richard dannatt 150x200.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gen richard dannatt 150x200.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. tomf688 (talk - email) 17:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately the fact remains that a free equivalent could be created that could adequately portray the same information, i.e. him speaking at a conference, or marching in a parade, or talking to a group of reporters, etc. See the first line of the fair use policy: "No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information." This applies to most living people, with the exception of those such as recluses. No image is preferable over a fair use image if it isn't conveying something that cannot possibly be conveyed freely. His image has already been deleted once before. --tomf688 (talk - email) 19:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

The images on Wikipedia should have free licenses for those actors, whereas others from the AP or whatnot are likely copyrighted and restricted on their use. --tomf688 (talk - email) 01:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Why not try this froma different angle - couldn't the licence be {{promotional}}? as this is the purpose of the picture? Alternatively, get an express authority from the Ministry of Defence for the picture to be used on the Wiki.Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...) 07:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:DavejohnstonPA 228x342.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:DavejohnstonPA 228x342.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

The same goes for Image:2178 2.jpg. Thanks, matt br 16:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Guy Smith journalist

A tag has been placed on Guy Smith journalist, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, 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 Wikipedia. Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 09:03, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Doctor donna2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Doctor donna2.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Strangerer (Talk) 17:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Doctor Who canon

Hi, Rob. Sorry about the late reply — I've been busy with real world stuff (as well as being gobsmacked by how good "Gridlock" was — but that's neither here nor there). To answer your question, the CiN special and TARDISODEs used to be listed as "supplemental canon", based on a conversation here. I changed that to "canonicity unclear" because I wanted to add The Infinite Quest without making a definitive statement about whether it's canonical or not, and I thought it was silly to have four sections of canonicity. But on reflection, the unclear canonical status of The Infinite Quest is no reason to besmirch the canonicity of the CiN special... maybe I'll change it back to "supplemental canon". One of these days I'm planning on restructuring that entire list, and maybe I'll find a structure that helps with things like this. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:04, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free image (Image:Ofc-03.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ofc-03.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. Yamla 20:25, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:CVU status

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 16:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:41GDEeGRmrL SS400 .jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:41GDEeGRmrL SS400 .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 13:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Dan Magnusson

A tag has been placed on Dan Magnusson 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 person or group of people, 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 biographies.

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. WebHamster 12:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Steve's Drummer

You'd be Rob from the hobo-low forum would you? If so, hi!

But, as is my understanding, the musician has to be notable in someway, and, as a backing musician, i don't think this would apply for the Devil's drummer, I'm sorry, perhaps ask oher people, but i can't help you.

Maybe if you start a page for the Level Devils as a band (i.e. Steve, Dan and the bassist) that would be allowed, as their album is in the UK Jazz and Blues charts atm.

Tell me what you decide upon.

JimHxn (talk) 13:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 14:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Doctor Who newsletter, March 2008

The Space-Time Telegraph

The WikiProject Doctor Who newsletter

Issue 1

March 2008

Project News: We have five new participants: Sm9800, Seanor3, T saston, Type 40, Jammy0002.; One editor has left the project: StuartDD.; The Doctor Who portal has expanded to increase the number of selected stories to 33.

Articles of note

New featured articles

None

New featured article candidates

Voyage of the Damned (Doctor Who) (FAC)

New good articles

Delisted articles: None

Proposals: A proposal for changing the layout of the episode pages is under way here.; A discussion about the formatting of the cast lists in episode pages is under way here.; A discussion to move United Nations Intelligence Taskforce to UNIT is under way here.
News: The Torchwood project has become a task-force under the project's scope.; The Torchwood series 2 finale airs on 4th April, and the 4th series of Doctor Who will start to air on 5th April.

For the Doctor Who project, Sceptre ^(talk) 19:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
You have received this letter because you are on the newsletter recipients list. To opt-out, please remove your name.