User talk:Romney yw

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Sax-a-Go-Go

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Sax-a-Go-Go, 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 Sax-a-Go-Go. Blanchardb-MeMyEarsMyMouth-timed 13:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I think this deletion notice related to my very original submission based simply on raw data from the CD sleeve. I removed the deletion notice when I added further detail later the same day. I hope the article is now safe? Probably because I'm relatively new, I found it was not very easy to understand what the deletion notice actually meant, and I was probably not looking in the right place for an explanation. Is the deletion notice linked to the appropriate policy? In addition, what is the best way to seek further general advice on the layout & presentation of track listing data for CDs (i.e. not specifically related to the Sax-a-Go-Go CD)? I've started by emulating the layout of similar pages nearby, but have already noticed some inconsistencies ..... Is there a policy for this? --Romney yw (talk) 06:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signature

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you've been adding your signature to some of your article contributions. This is a simple mistake to make and is easy to correct. For future reference, the need to associate edits with users is taken care of by an article's edit history. Therefore, you should use your signature only when contributing to talk pages, the Village Pump, or other such discussion pages. For a better understanding of what distinguishes articles from these type of pages, please see What is an article?. Again, thanks for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you. --Blanchardb-MeMyEarsMyMouth-timed 01:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice re signatures. I'd unfortunately misread the introduction pages which I now realise refer specifically to signatures on discussion pages. I was just logging on to rectify my mistake when I discovered your comments. Lesson learned (I hope). You also appear to have already removed the offending signature which saves me a job!--Romney yw (talk) 06:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:EnnioMorricone-OUATITW Cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:EnnioMorricone-OUATITW Cover.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) 18:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Candy Dulfer Sax-a-go-go cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Candy Dulfer Sax-a-go-go cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:WendyAndLisa-EroicaAlbumCover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WendyAndLisa-EroicaAlbumCover.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) 06:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:WendyAndLisa-WendyAndLisaAlbumCover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WendyAndLisa-WendyAndLisaAlbumCover.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) 06:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New infobox banners

They belong on the talk page of articles. Please do not place them on the article themselves, but on the talk page. Thanks, -MBK004 00:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't say that in Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup#Infobox needed - unlike the other template "single infobox request" which clearly does say that it should be used on talk pages. Please provide a reference which documents use of this template on talk pages. (There's actually a whole debate here - as a relatively new editor I find the subject of which templates are supposed to go on the talk page and which on the main article very confusing indeed. Also the practice of putting templates on talk pages is in part responsible for the ghastly DEFAULTSORT vs. ListAs parameter mess over in the Biography project. But some other time, perhaps...) --Romney yw (talk) 01:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
The documentation for the template in question: {{newinfobox}} says under the usage heading: "This template goes on an article's talk page, not on the article itself because infobox formatting or replacement is not an article content issue". Also, I left you the message only regarding ship articles, as the editors at WP:SHIPS have done with Category:Ship articles needing infobox conversion where the talk page instruction is also. Regards, -MBK004 02:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
As I said - very confusing. The second sentence in the first section of the template documentation reads "As well as adding the message to the article, it adds the article to an appropriate category for cleanup", which doesn't sound at all like the talk page until you read further down. As far as I can tell from the DEFAULTSORT vs. ListAs debate, you can't add an article to a category by putting a template on its talk page ... Please can you arrange for the summary documentation in Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup#Infobox needed to include the use on talk page statement for both infobox templates? Many thanks --Romney yw (talk) 02:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
You are correct, but the category added to the talk page is sufficient, because the relevant wikiprojects including Ships use the category to replace the infoboxes according to the templates on the talk pages. As for the Defaultsort vs. ListAs debate, I have not involved myself at all. I can make the edit to Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup#Infobox needed, as suggested to clarify things. -MBK004 02:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the update to Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup#Infobox needed and for drawing the issue to my attention. I'll make sure any future {{newinfobox}} templates are added to the talk page, and also try to remember to read the specific template documentation more carefully in future - especially when using a new template for the first time. Cheers!--Romney yw (talk) 13:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)