Talk:Studio

Disambig?[edit]

Is there any reason this article shouldn't be mostly axed and replaced by a simply disambiguation page conforming to MoS:DP? Tedernst 05:26, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Because it isn't a disambiguation page, there is no ambiguity to solve, rather it is following Wikipedia:Summary style. For other examples see Time. All the topics on this page are related, it serves readers looking to explore the subject. Since all forms of studio grew from the same root it makes no sense, to me, to disambiguate. Is there any reason a reader would come here and be confused or not find what they were looking for? Is there any ambiguity? I agree the article could be better written, but I don't think that is best served by slashing the text away. Hiding talk 08:05, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's a reason. I thought there must be one that I simply wasn't seeing. The abiguity I was seeing (and still am) was between the different types of studions, that mostly have their own articles. No worries. I'll drop it here. Tedernst 08:26, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WIZARD REPORT [STUDIO 10 ARCADIA]: ... asked how long computer games take - 7 answers yahoo then removed with violate-elektra - (beware burning avaris) -- surmised that computer games are at a studio 10 level --- studio 10 centaur computer games {NP REVOLUTION}... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.212.12 (talk) 12:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mastering Studio[edit]

Hi all, I've edited the mastering studio section to clear up a bit of mis info about audio mastering and to clearly differentiate between audio and video mastering. Would the studio http://www.platinum-mastering.com be suitable as an example? Maybe we could include a video example as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.248.60 (talk) 11:35, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jane Frank Portrait .jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Jane Frank Portrait .jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:52, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done...Modernist (talk) 13:03, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Safalta pane ke liye[edit]

Safalta pane ke liye 103.118.116.227 (talk) 20:08, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]