This user has departed Wikipedia. Madchester has not edited Wikipedia since 30 June 2019. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

I'm on a wiki-break and will be doing more "casual" editing over the next couple of months

Talk archives:

• Archive 1 (2005 to 2005.07.15):
• Archive 2 (2005.07.18 to 2005.09.21):
• Archive 3 (2005.09.22 to 2005.12.17):
• Archive 4 (2005.12.18 to 2006.04.14):
• Archive 5 (2006.04.15 to 2006.07.16):
• Archive 6 (2006.07.17 to 2006.09.21):
• Archive 7 (2006.09.23 to 2007.04.30):
• Archive 8 (2007.05.04 to 2007.06.27):
• Archive 9 (2007.06.28 to 2007.11.07):
• Archive 10 (2007.11.16 to 2008.02.18):
• Archive 11 (2008.02.25 to 2008.08.24):
• Archive 12 (2008.08.25 to 2009.09.26):

An editor has asked for a deletion review of David Wong. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Genb2004 (talk) 18:48, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Trade has been verified by Darren Dreger of TSN.ca and Rejean Shero of the Pittsburgh Penguins. Link has been posted on the Penguins home page. http://penguins.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=519736&navid=DL%7CPIT%7Chome Jasonstru (talk) 03:50, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep reverting the tour dates to A Rush of Blood to the Head tour, they are the real dates.--Coldplay Expert 00:35, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. We don't add details to Wikipedia because they're true, we add them if they can be verified by a reliable source. A fan site lacks proper editorial screening and is not considered a reliable source.
2. We don't add flag icons merely for decorations (WP:MOSFLAG).

Thanks. --Madchester (talk) 18:52, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then, can we please add the dates in some form instead of deleting them alltogether?--Coldplay Expert 19:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I must say that even though we dont always get along, you do seem to be a good editor of coldplay articles, putting something in Strawberry Swing before I can! :)--Coldplay Expert 00:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Flag icons were removed from two Depeche Mode touring articles and I can't read anything on WP:MOSFLAG that states that placing them in such a way (in this case, an article about a concert tour) is inappropriate. I did read the section about using decorative images (WP:ALT) which recommended disabling the link to the flag icons to improve web usability. Will that suffice? Thanks. (Freak.scenery (talk) 21:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I used flag icons in the articles I was editing as a visual cue for the reader, so it is unfair to deem them redundant. Per the appropriate use section of WP:MOSICON, icons may "aid navigation in long lists or tables of information as some readers can more quickly scan a series of icons due to the visual differences between icon." It also suggests that these icons are accompanied by sortable tables, which I plan to do.

The guideline also states "Icons may be purely decorative in the technical sense that they convey no additional useful information and nothing happens when you click on them; but purely decorative icons should still have a useful purpose in providing visual cues or layout".

To my understanding, the "do not emphasise nationality without good reason" guideline applies to instances where flags are associated with a particular person, or a particular collective of people or organisation. I find it hard to believe that people would assume emphasis on the locations where the tour dates took place. The flags are in seperate columns after all, away (but still adjacent) to the country name. Again, I reiterate my perspective on their utility as a visual cue. (Freak.scenery (talk) 21:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Hi. What did you do? Before your modifications the article was perfect. The flag icons were a easier way to navigate through lists of tour dates... Why do you delete the setlist variations? Also as the flag icons, it were a easy way to find the selist from your city. I don't understand you. For last, if you want references or sources, please visit the Official Depeche Mode WebSite http://www.depechemode.com/tour/setlists.html
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Live.Forever.11 (talk • contribs) 03:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Having just read WP:MOSFLAG, I find nothing that this edit violates so why do you keep on reverting the edits to Viva la Vida Tour?--Coldplay Expert 16:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a freelance writer doing work on the band, the setlist variations are incredibly helpful and there are few places on the web that are as comprehensive and as frequently updated as the wikipedia is. The current format is user-friendly as well. If the point of wikipedia is to assist scholars, then the setlist variations, as presented, should be left intact. Perhaps after the tour a cleaner way of presenting material could be worked out (and I agree that the number-crunching stuff regarding how often a song was played is just trainspotting for the sake of). But an "in-progress" tour should be allowed some leeway to organically develop. In any case, it is working for me, as a researcher, the way it is. Jackbox1971 (talk) 01:46, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and just a starting point for research - it is not an almanac (or fan site) recording each and every detail of an event. Fan sites and setlist wikis (like Setlist.fm) contain details that go beyond the scope of Wikipedia's coverage. --Madchester (talk) 21:06, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, something like a simple list of songs shouldn't be something that needs ground-up, primary sourced research. I can get verification from people who actually see the shows, but one does have to start somewhere. I am not always sure how well thought out the various guidelines on wiki are. To my mind, you are either organic or you are not. That being said, I appreciate the care you take with your monitoring. It is slightly terrifying but comforting too. (Just a little levity...) Jackbox1971 (talk) 01:43, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didnt know you could not put lyrics into wikipedia is there a rule that states this? Thanks for future ref(Monkeymanman (talk) 17:18, 21 October 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Hi there I am in need of some advice. Is there a rule in wikipedia that states that TV Series articles absolutely most use a title card. If so I have been talking to someone by the name of Bignole and apparently they often edit articles. But everytime I submit something even if it's minor they change it. And some of the reason's there sending aren't making sense. I've asked them to show me a guideline that explains title cards on main pages but they've sent me nothing. Now, I've made some errors in submitting fan-art and reverting photos and I'm sorry but i don't know what else to do to please this person, Bignole. So I need your help? --JKSarang 03:35, 8 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by JKSarang (talk • contribs)

Thanks for the reminder you gave Roman888; I really don't want to respond to him at all, and thereby reinforce his petulant behavior. Have you looked at his user page? (not talk page) He's using similar language there. I after this attack, I'm starting to ask myself where we reach a point with him that some sort of action is in order. Drmargi (talk) 16:55, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And now, given the below, this has begun to make me a bit uncomfortable with a tone that verges on a threat. Drmargi (talk) 21:03, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Madchester, thank you for your constructive comments in the discussion page of Kitchen Nightmares. Your arguments have merit, but is entirely unconvincing. Rather than condemning the behaviour of DrMargi and his clique, I will just be gathering lots of evidence of their continuous reverts and report them. Just for your information, I will be taking the matter of Kitchen Nightmares to arbitration (I have already gotten positive feedback from one of the main moderators about the updates) when I have the time and settle this matter once and for all. Roman888 (talk) 18:10, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:POINT... Wiki's not a platform to hold some vendetta against other editors. The tone I see here is one of "getting back" at certain editors for disgareeing with you. That's not approriate behaviour here.... --Madchester (talk) 19:24, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me point out to you that there is no personal vendetta here against any individuals, rather a pattern of abuse that can be seen over the course of a few months - the constant reverts and censorship. Rather than discussing the issues, there are automatic reverts and censorship being carried out. Notice that a certain individual keeps coming to your talk page and others' looking for for a shoulder to cry on. Don't you see a pattern of abuse and collusion ....WP:VAN? Roman888 (talk) 21:17, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you clearly haven't engaged both partys of the disagreement I will be looking into complaining about your decision as an admin. The other guy clearly was displaying edit war behavior but you have not commented this on his profile —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.15.9.117 (talk) 02:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Madchester. I'm noting some confusion at Roy Halladay about including information about the apparently imminent trade. I agree with your reversion of the infobox change, but I don't find in WP:CRYSTAL any basis for excluding reports about the trade on the grounds that no official announcement has been made: WP:CRYSTAL imposes no such requirement: it merely says that unverifiable speculation ought not to be included. As this story has been published in the sports pages of dozens of major newspapers across the continent, it's not at all unverifiable speculation: it's plenty verifiable: it's been published in multiple reliable sources. WP:CRYSTAL was never intended to exclude information like this, and, in my opinion, any editor is well within his or her rights to include the fact that an imminent trade has been reported in The Globe, The Star, The New York Times, The Washington Post (it's a long list). If it's solid enough to appear here and here, that's plenty good enough for Wikipedia.

If we were required to stick only to information from official sources, Wikipedia would be composed chiefly of material drawn from press releases. Cheers. --Rrburke^ekrubrR 17:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's only verifiable information about a tentative agreement. There are no verifiable sources about the deal having been completed by any of the 3 clubs. Per WP:CRYSTAL, we avoid changes based on speculated roster changes - hence we wait for a verifiable source to confirm a transaction is actually official before changing XXX number of related pages. --Madchester (talk) 18:05, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point out the personal attack? I raised a point that the editor in question reverted a change I made and, in my opinion, is now intentionally misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riksweeney (talk • contribs) 18:35, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cookie (cockatoo). Thank you.. WossOccurring (talk) 14:28, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AAGF. Don't take it personally when your recent AFD noms have not "gone your way". Thanks. --Madchester (talk) 20:05, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You were throwing around accusations of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, despite there being no evidence for this. I'd expect better from an experienced user; clearly not the case. WossOccurring (talk) 20:29, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, WP:AAGF and don't take critcism about your edits personally. Thanks. --Madchester (talk) 20:45, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Practice what you preach. Also, if you didn't vivaciously criticise people in such a way, there would be nothing for them to be offended about. Just something to think about. WossOccurring (talk) 21:19, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, WP:AAGF and WP:COOL - the only way you'll learn the ropes around Wiki is to learn from any criticism from other editors. No one is criticizing you - only your edits; this goes back to not taking othe people's criticsm of your edits personally. i.e., consider why another editor would suspect your edits of violating WP:IDONTLIKEIT and learn from those comments.... if you review WP:IDONTLIKEIT, it's common for editors to nominate an AFD becuase they view the topic as trivia... Thanks. --Madchester (talk)

N.B... editor WossOccuring has since been blocked indefinitely for bein a sockpuppet.... see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Dalejenkins --Madchester (talk) 05:06, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did 'again review the talk page carefully'

I disagree, thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.214.245.131 (talk) 21:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

you win, keep the page however you please. I have a life and no more time to waste. You are a perfect example of what has driven everyone else off of wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.214.245.131 (talk) 04:55, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AGF. Wiki's about reaching consensus - not unilaterally changing articles as you please. Thanks. --Madchester (talk) 05:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Madchester! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 6 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Sophie Muller - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Ken Nelson (British record producer) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Vanessa Lorenzo - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So, I need an explanation for some of your edits. You specifically deleted links to YouTube (not a personal site) but left up links to personal web pages on the same page. The YouTube links are the only existing public videos off the airport and do not reside on my personal homepage, I realize that the user page on YouTube is mine, but how else could I upload videos to be publicly available?

If I were linking to a personal page, I might understand, but YouTube is for everyone. It would be the same as if I had uploaded it to Archive.org and lent a CC license to it and then linked it. It would still be on a third party website.

It is well within the EL guidlines "Linking to user-submitted video sites: There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (see Restrictions on linking and Links normally to be avoided). Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. Links to online videos should also identify the software necessary for readers to view the content. For example, all links to YouTube videos should, if applicable, indicate that Flash video software or a web browser supporting H.264 is necessary to see the content."

Additionally, you left links to airliners.net which is a third party website with user generated content, like YouTube. I think you've taken the admin editing a little far. I had links to 2 videos out of the 75 that I have for Kai Tak. Hardly, personal promotion. They were of the two things people associate specifically with the Hong Kong Kai Tak airport, the checkerboard approach and the low planes over Kowloon.

Where do you suggest that videos of a now closed airport should go? I either specifically filmed the video (origin of copyright) or have a collection of open source and Creative Commons Share Alike aviation videos. Again, YouTube is a third party website.

Excerpt showing the links you left and the two you deleted.

• An account by a Kai Tak Air Traffic Controller - Phil Parker
• Pictures from Kai Tak: Airliners.net - Jetphotos.net
• Cockpit video of landing at Kai Tak on YouTube
• Video of planes landing at Kai Tak on YouTube

Please explain, thanks. airboyd (talk) 19:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While YouTube is not a personal website... you've continually added external links to personal YT page/videos. That's to be avoided per WP:SPAMMER's provisions for self-promotion. If you feel your videos are worthwhile additions to articles, you should be bringing up discussion on a talk page to see what if other editors A)think it's a valuable addition and B)if it's not deemed to be self-promotion for your own videos. Thanks.

N.B... and don't get me started on the potential Wikipedia:ELNEVER issues...because we never link to any (YouTube) videos that are not hosted by the original rights holder.... --Madchester (talk) 19:53, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will follow your instructions for the talk page. I was hoping you'd provide general answers to the questions I asked prior to escalating the discussion to the next step. Maybe I don't have the dispute resolution guidelines down well?

1. Why leave a link to a personal Geocities (defunct) site, but take down other links you identify as personal?

2. What is your criterion for deciding what personal page is adding (Geocites site with personal photos and anecdotes) and that which is detracting (2 YouTube videos)?

3. How would one add pertinent valuable video while maintaining copyright flow, if not through a "neutral" third-party video site?

4. How are personal photos on Airliners.net any different than personal videos on YouTube?

I agreed with you previously, that my YT page was a personal page (as opposed to airboyd.com, which is a personal page), but it would have to be somewhat personal in nature to satisfy the copyright demands that you, quite rightly, state have to be met. The links were to specific videos and not to my personal "channel." I have contributed 700+ , mostly open source and CC-BY-SA, videos on YouTube, I have less than 5 linked from the entire Wikipedia. I'd call self-promtion or spam-linking a bit of a stretch?

Checking my stats, Wikipedia is responsible for 000.03% of the 3,000,000+ combined views on the specific videos linked to the article out of more than 36,000,000 total views of all of my videos. What would I have to gain from less than 1500 clicks from here? Where is the self-promotion? Where is my gain? I have been a contributor here as long as you have and turned down an admin request to help with the aviation pages. I have no need to be the most popular YouTuber, but was providing pertinent and specific video to the Kai Tak page. In regards to "worthwhile additions to articles," this is video that no one else has online anywhere and specifically shows, visually, what the article talks about and I can verify the copyright source. I actually worked at the airport during 1997-1998. An example of this is the IGS Checkerboard Approach. I linked an actual video of it. It's very difficult to visualize using the included text "...Upon reaching a small hill marked with a checkerboard in red and white, used as a visual reference point on the final approach, the pilot needed to make a 47° visual right turn to line up with the runway and complete the final leg..." unless you had actually been there and seen it yourself.

It seems to me that having a video showing what the actual text from the article is describing is exactly what an internet encyclopedia should do. No?

Thanks for your time, airboyd (talk) 23:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

then do that for other articles not just that one. I guess i should go remove the grammy stuff from music artists.74.234.21.245 (talk) 03:46, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you clarify the Crystal policy for me. I noticed you undid my edit saying LeBron James won the 2010 MVP trophy. Pretty much everyone knows LeBron has won the MVP, the announcement is all but arbitrary today. Many sources have reported it for days, so how does my edit violate the Crystal policy? I'm new to this policy and any clarification would help. Thanks. JakeH07 (talk) 17:29, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Where can propose a page to protection? 188.25.226.89 (talk) 19:24, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I hope Madchester doesn't mind me responding to a question on their talk page but I came across this by accident through Huggle and I know the answer so thought I'd help out. You can request protection for pages at WP:RFPP, however there must be sufficient vandalism and it must also be recent. Hope this helps :) --5 albert square (talk) 19:34, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Thank you for letting me know about this certain topic. I saw the flag on some pages and then thought it's okay to add it. Are there any special situations where the flag needs to be displayed? -- And Rew 00:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks for your help.-- And Rew 01:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As creator of the Sones Roses Begging You article maybe you will be interested in a little discussion that was (or is) talked in your article. ThanksKim FOR sure (talk) 20:20, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seems your beautiful inline link in the article is threatened. Feel free to see if you agree with it [[1]]. Kim FOR sure (talk) 21:38, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Pollstar has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no evidence of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:08, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:KitchenNightmares.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:53, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have a growing feeling our old friend Roman888, in the form of an IP hopper, is back on these articles, pushing the restaurant updates again. There's not a lot to go on yet, and the article for Kitchen Nightmares is already semi-protected because of his sockpuppetry. Now he's moved over to Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares, and some of the old rhetoric seems to be emerging; there's also a familiar pattern to the IPs he's using. I thought I'd give you a heads up just in case you'd like to take a peek and see what's going on. Drmargi (talk) 19:23, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Madchester,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chlopeck (talk • contribs) 03:59, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

this image Kim Clijsters London 2012 Women's Singles Quarterfinals.jpg of London 2012. I want to know is this from official site or you got from somewhere else. If it is from official site then let me know in which category of license do you upload because I also want to upload some image of London 2012

I was in London at that match - just review the photo's (EXIF) details. --Madchester (talk) 02:31, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CNEMagicPass.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 05:37, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I understand the procedure for getting an article undeleted is to first talk to the admin who deleted the page. 8-9 years ago, you deleted David Wong's page. Back then, it was determined David Wong was a new attorney who had not accomplished anything of significance. But since then, David Wong put an end to frivolous lawsuits by George Louie by getting him declared a vexatious litigant in California, which prohibited him from filing any more frivolous ADA lawsuits. In the legal community, there is no lawyer who would say getting someone declared a vexatious litigant is an easy thing to do. Also, David Wong has gone on to give several concerts and is on tour (www.davidwongpianist.com). It's notable that he can do both. Would you kindly reconsider your position in light of the new facts that have arisen? Genb2004 (talk) 17:20, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As one of the previous contributors to {{Infobox film}} or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a RfC started on the talk page as to implementation of previously deprecated parameters. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing!

This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 18:27, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:TiedToThe90s.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:56, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Roses in the Hospital is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roses in the Hospital until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lachlan Foley (talk) 10:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Live8BitterSweetSymphony.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Supernature (Goldfrapp album cover).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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:38, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox concert tour has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox concert. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Alakzi (talk) 09:26, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article Golden Gaze has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No references, no claim of notability, fails WP:NSONG and WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Richhoncho (talk) 15:49, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:RiotOnAnEmptyStreet.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:55, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:QuietIsTheNewLoud.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:47, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Millennium1.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:35, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Madchester. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:AllAblaze.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:KeepWhatYaGot.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Whispers.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:DolphinsWereMonkeys.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:GoldenGaze.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Madchester.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Madchester. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 01:15, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Madchester. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:AROBTTHTour.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:26, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Madchester. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Driftwood cover.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:28, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Turn (Travis song).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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:41, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:WDIAROM.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:42, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:TwistedLogic.gif. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:16, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:24, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox shopping mall has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox building. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. PPEMES (talk) 21:46, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You just stay around to keep the tools, you just stay around to keep the tools! You think that we're all fools, you just stay around to keep the tools! Making minute edits every year, you make minute edits every year! We can see it's very clear, you make minute edits every year! Users such as yourself who make a significantly low amount of edits just to keep your administrative tools sicken me and many others. Just give up the tools already!!! What are you holding on to them for anyways!! What a selfish thing to do!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.35.104.149 (talk) 16:36, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next month.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:07, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next several days.

Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:05, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions have been removed.

Subject to certain time limits and other restrictions, your administrative permissions may be returned upon request at WP:BN.

Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — xaosflux ^Talk 14:57, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kiss Ya Lips (No I.D.) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiss Ya Lips (No I.D.) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Boleyn (talk) 14:51, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:EmbraceAGloriousDay.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 06:04, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:SealIV.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Wikipedia having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:34, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Charlie Chaplin has been nominated for merging with Template:Charlie Chaplin filmography. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:56, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Guero cover.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 22:25, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]