I think I've let both of those notices stay there long enough.

-25 November Saberwolf116 (talk) 18:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated 45th President of the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did not wrote anything about Stevens is former Senator. I just corrected that he is not longest-serving Republican Senator in history (he did not spend 40 years in office yet), but Second-longest after Thurmond (who served much longer) Darth Kalwejt (talk) 18:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry. It's just that there's been a lot of edit conflict lately, and I assumed you had since you were on there.My bad*facepalm*.Saberwolf116 (talk) 18:56, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Daschle has already been nominated by President-elect Obama as Secretary of the Health and Human Services and this has been reported by the press. See link from Bloomberg:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=akIkz9Ue.xTc&refer=home

"Former South Dakota Senator Tom Daschle has accepted Obama’s offer to become Health and Human Services secretary, though the selection hasn’t been formally announced."

So STOP reverting this change, they just haven't held the press conference yet but he has been offered the position and accepted. 192.234.99.1 (talk) 00:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It does't matter if every news source in America confirms it, it's still speculation until he's announced.Saberwolf116 (talk) 14:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, Daschle has been announced and mentioned by Obama himself in interviews as part of his healthcare team as HHS chief. It is valid enough to list on his page. Rbc224 (talk) 16:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I see what you're saying, he cannot be added until he is offically announced, even if we already know he will be. It's kind of annoying that way, but you know WP:Crystal works.Saberwolf116 (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Tom Daschle. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Spiesr (talk) 20:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Stairwell A, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

No evidence of significant coverage of the topic in reliable sources.

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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, 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. Skomorokh 04:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that you are acting in good faith, but it is best if featured articles are nominated by people who have worked closely on them. In this way, they can give reasoned replies to reviewers and be familiar enough with the sources to act on suggested improvements. Someone who has not worked on the article can not provide this input, so the nomination may continue until opposition to it becomes so overwhelming that the article is failed; this takes away time from reviewers. While the The Great Gatsby article is of reasonable quality, it is not yet of featured quality, and principal contributors must be consulted before a nomination, as required in the featured article candidate instructions. I hope you can work with User:JayHenry and other editors to bring the article up to the Featured article criteria, and look forward to seeing it back at FAC when it's ready. Maralia (talk) 16:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on List of Fallout Vaults, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because List of Fallout Vaults is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting List of Fallout Vaults, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 01:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated List of Fallout Vaults, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Fallout Vaults. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. MASEM 16:29, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Please could you provide a source for this? - thanks in anticipation. 210.4.103.246 (talk) 13:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, that was awhile back. You can go ahead and delete it.Saberwolf116 (talk) 23:31, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the speedy reply - much appreciated. 210.4.103.246 (talk) 07:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are from Uncyclopedia too? I just opened up an Uncyclopedian embassy. The jokes in Wikipedia are tasteless. Remember, in Soviet Russia, Jimbo Wales love YOU! Joe9320 of the Wikipedia Party | Contact Assembly of Jimbo Wales 01:33, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

YAY JOEY! I'll be sure to visit the embassy. Saberwolf116 (talk) 01:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You think this is Uncyclopedia. That's where you belong.Ms dos mode (talk) 04:05, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're one of the strangest Uncyclopedia vandals i've met thus far. Saberwolf116 (talk) 04:21, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Ok, here it goes: I don't want to hurt your feelings or anything, but the images you keep adding to the Gateway Arch article are just not that good. Exposure is low, colors are dull, the composition is flawed (cut-off parts) and they do not add anything to the article. Furthermore the caption of your picture now reads Because of the Arch's shape, numerous pilots have attempted to fly through it. This is an unsourced statement that, even if it is true, is just a minor bit of trivia. It does not connect to anything that is written in the article, it does not even describe the picture in particular. In short; it is not an improvement of the article. --Dschwen 20:02, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mmk, you can do what you want. I suppose I was a bit jumpy about it because I made it specifically for Wikipedia. *shrugs* I've got my images scattered elsewhere, so i'm fine if you remove them. Your images aren't perfect, though. Saberwolf116 (talk) 21:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course my images are not perfect! Being perfect is not the criterion for inclusion in the article. Adding value and improving the article as a whole is the criterion. I make my images specifically for Wikipedia as well, I neither sell or upload them to sites like flickr. Wikipedia is my only motivation. Listen I pointed out some specific point that can be improved in you photos (granted, you cannot control the weather and I'm not opposed to gray skies per se). You can take this as constructive criticisim and believe me that my main goal is improving the articles or.. ..well you can just think that I must be full of my self, that I probably get off on having my pictures and mine alone in articles, that I'm giving you unwanted advice (this part is actually true), and that I'm completely biased when talking about my own images. Your choice, but take a peek at WP:AGF first ;-) --Dschwen 22:59, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then, I think a few of them are sub-par as well, but I do have some good ones that i'll try to fit in ;). Saberwolf116 (talk) 00:25, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The images were changed on consensus. Please do not change them again. –túrian^patois 22:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC) Mmk. Saberwolf116 (talk) 22:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Twin Towers Sunrise 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 about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. RaseaC (talk) 21:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Twin Towers Sunrise, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twin Towers Sunrise. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 22:58, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WELL IT ISN'T!!! This isn't Uncyclopedia! It's Wikpedia! Please, don't be a vandal! —Preceding unsigned comment added by T3h 1337 b0y (talk • contribs) 04:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:7 World Trade Center Looking up.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:7 World Trade Center Looking up.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:7 World Trade Center Looking up.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 14:53, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Twin Towers sunrise.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 Dude (talk) 07:36, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Wikipedia policy is not to allow people who are minors in their local jurisdictions to post certain pieces of information that could be used to identify them or steal their identities. As such, I have removed your age from your user page. Please remember that editing on wikipedia is a privilege, and that privilege requires the agreement to abide by its policies and guidelines. If you have any questions as to the potential danger that may arise from posting such information, please ask your parents to explain it to you. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 05:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd have asked, I would've removed it. But OK, I can see the logic behind your decision. Saberwolf116 (talk) 03:28, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Kurt Cobain.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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I nominated the image for deletion because a free image of Cobain exists. Regards Hekerui (talk) 22:49, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain this date change, without a rationale it would appear to be an insidious edit. cygnis insignis 14:05, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seemed anachronistic to me. Wasn't she born sometimes in the 1500s? Saberwolf116 (talk) 16:53, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! What a conundrum, what are we to do? shall we keep guessing and see if the truth emerges? cygnis insignis 17:43, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was just trying to correct it. When I see stuff that doesn't make sense on Wikipedia, it bugs me. Saberwolf116 (talk) 19:38, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I am Brazilian and I need of you to correct my translation edits, please help me in the Changing legal gender assignment in Brazil, LGBT rights in Brazil, Recognition of same-sex unions in Brazil, Age of consent in Brazil, Prejudice in the Brazilian LGBT community. 23 December 2010 (UTC) User: Hentzer

Hello! In FEBRUARY, in the Supreme Federal Court of Brazil will be aproved the *SAME-SEX MARRIAGE IN BRAZIL* ([1]), and the pages LGBT rights in Brazil and Recognition of same-sex unions in Brazil need of you. Because will generate a heavy traffic on these pages, and we need you to help in the English spelling of these pages, you understand me? Please help me. Hentzer (talk) 12:00, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Arab World With Flags.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 22:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Dream out loud \ (talk) 01:13, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and delete it; I uploaded back before the memorial was completed. Saberwolf116 (talk) 00:47, 6 October 2011 (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) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Robert Graves.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:44, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Gateway Arch Looking Up.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, low quality, better files at c:Category:Gateway Arch.

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

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 00:28, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Gateway Arch May 2009.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, low quality, better files at c:Category:Gateway Arch.

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

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 00:28, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]