This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
WP:YORKS is a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (3343 on April 27th). WP:GM has the lead in FAs. WP:YORKS is lacking in the area of GAs and falls well behind WP:LONDON. This topic was at the front of the new aims discussion and is an important issue for WP:YORKS.
As mentioned above, new aims have been decided. See the right hand column for more details.
Member News
There are now 45 members of WikiProject Yorkshire! A warm welcome to the 2 new members that have joined us since March:
No users left the WikiProject this month, but the list may need trimming to account for the one user who was permanently blocked and one who seems not to exist. There are also several who have not contributed to Wikipedia for some months.
The format of the member list has been altered to:
allow easier editing for new members
assist members to communicate more easily (by including members talk pages)
allow member to keep up to date with each other's contributions
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
Don't Forget...
Monitor Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism can be removed as quickly as possible.
Images! There is a shortage of good images in Yorkshire related articles, particularly on pages about smaller settlements. A good place to start would be the requested photographs category but please remember that there are many articles not within this category that have the same need.
Assessment Assess and review Assessment of Yorkshire related articles has been brought up to date recently, but needs constant maintenance.
Last but not Least... Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is in permanent need of attention. Please take a look and see what you can do.
Delivered May 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage.
→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 10:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Upload an Image
hi, u recently contacted me on my talk page, (stephent90).
I have an image of Ince & Elton train station which I wish to upload, (photograph taken by me, owned by me), but as I am not yet an autoconfirmed user, I cannot do this.
Is there any way that would enable me to upload this picture now?
How do I delete images of mine that I am not satisfied with from commons? Britishrailclass91 (talk) 18:57, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
What image(s) would you be thinking of in particular. It might not be possible to delete all of them I'm afraid. Just a note about Commons regarding your comment about leaving and using Flickr instead. Commons isn't and doesn't intend to be a photo sharing site like Flickr, the idea of Commons is that you upload selected photos which are useful to one or more Wikimedia Foundation projects rather than sharing all photos you've taken as you might do on Flickr. Adambro (talk) 19:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Poetlister images
I have responded on my talk page here and on my talk page at Commons. I'm sorry if having the conversation in two different places makes it difficult for you to read. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 02:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
I feel as the service is infrequent, and many trains terminate at various destinations, it improves the article as it shows what destinations are available from the station. (rail articles tend to have comments such as "every 30 minutes", something which cannot be used here due to the irregular timings.
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Rockpool kayaks logo.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Rockpool kayaks logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm aware of the situation; thank you. Ral315 (talk) 18:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Pornography
Haven't you seen all of the news (see the wikipedia signpost) about how there is pornography. An encyclopedia that can be accessed by children should not have this sort of content! Britishrailclass91 (talk) 11:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Like Adam has said on various talk pages, since when did a naked human automatically equal pornography? This whole thing has really been blown way out of the water. Do you not think that such images are present in other encyclopaedias? ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:17, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
That's my point. Are explicit and amateur pictures (I don't mean diagrams, illustrations, drawings or professional or artistic pictures) present in Encyclopedia Britannica or Encarta? I'd like to see some examples. Thank you. Eklipse (talk) 16:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I think JGXenite's point here is not entirely relevant. Whilst I would agree it is important to recognise that other more conventional encyclopaedias will cover controversial topics it is not necessarily possible to directly compare these with Wikipedia in an attempt to support or oppose the inclusion of the images. Wikipedia isn't an encyclopaedia in the conventional sense, we're not limited by space like a printed encyclopaedia would be and so where they might have to decide not to include images in some articles due to space limitations, we don't have this consideration. Therefore, simply because Encyclopedia Britannica for example does not include similar images, this does not mean that we shouldn't. Adambro (talk) 16:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but what I see is that wikipedians are becoming too confident. While their work that made this encyclopedia is something to be proud of, and indeed Wikipedia is far better than any other reference work in so many aspects, one should not forget that we are striving to build a professional encyclopedia, which should adhere as closely to the established academic writing rules, and gain its reliable status as other encyclopedias written by scholars. The MOS, especially the policies on the use of citations, IPA, trademarks... are a clear example of Wikipedia professionalism. Therefore, I don't see why Encarta and Britannica shouldn't be seen, or at least partly, as models. So, I don't know why you should sacrifice Wikipedia's professionalism in order to highlight its uniqueness and its "free-speech" and "no taboo" environment with really bad taste pictures (look at fluffing and stripper) doesn't anyone have common sense?) which are uploaded because editors are mostly anonymous persons and not renowned scholars. Eklipse (talk) 17:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
In the case of the two articles you highlight, I'm afraid I must suggest that the images are useful in assisting the reader in understanding the topic. Adambro (talk) 17:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
The policies you refer to are to ensure that accuracy and legal compliance remain priorities. Professionalism, at least in a traditional sense, isn't necessarily where those come from. We're an encyclopedia, but we're also a wiki. Equazcion•✗/C •17:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Penis
How dare you link such an article to my talk page, I am thoroughly disgusted with your actions. If I were an admin, I would block you! I will be deleting the link. Britishrailclass91 (talk) 17:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
That's probably why you're not an admin. Adambro (talk) 18:02, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I was just about to say the same thing... *rolleyes*
I am starting to get increasingly annoyed with wikipedia users who seem to think pornography is fine for wikipedia. And to think I used to trust you Adambro. Britishrailclass91 (talk) 18:20, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps you'd be more comfortable with a censored, professionally produced source of information, rather than an uncensored, community-produced one. Equazcion•✗/C •18:24, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Quite Equazcion - Wikipedia is uncensored and community produced. Overall, there is nothing wrong with the pictures - as has been said, they are perfectly relevant for the articles they are included in. If you do not like them, don't go on the articles featuring them. There are far worse things out there on the Internet than the pictures on the articles in question. ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey Adam. Do you think that Sure Radio is notable enough to have its own page? I've been deliberating for a while as to whether or not I should take it to AfD. Most of the stuff there isn't referenced, and while it is fairly well known within the University, I'm not sure whether it is notable enough for its own page. Cheers. ~~ [Jam][talk] 23:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Geograph railway station images
Good point. I'll avoid using old photographs in the infobox when there is a new one available. Edward (talk) 14:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
wiki.xyrael.net
I am Adambro on wiki.xyrael.net. Adambro (talk) 17:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Rollback rights
Ok, I am consulting you, now please, inquiring minds want to know what the benefit of having both rollbacker and syop rights are. :D Tiptoetytalk 23:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Editor Review
I thought I would start off the reviewing - no-one else seemed keen! Btline (talk) 22:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
WP:YORKS is a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 3343 last month to 3509 on May 28th). WP:GM has the lead in FAs. WP:YORKS is lacking in the area of GAs and falls well behind WP:LONDON. This topic was at the front of the new aims discussion and is an important issue for WP:YORKS.
As mentioned above, new aims have been decided. See the right hand column for more details.
Member News
There are now 45 members of WikiProject Yorkshire! A warm welcome to the 4 new members that have joined us since the May newsletter:
No users left the WikiProject this month, but the list has been trimmed to account for the one user who was permanently blocked and one who seems not to exist. There are also several who have not contributed to Wikipedia for some months. However it is the exam season :-)
Malcolm Bryant (talk·contribs) does not seem to have registered on Wikipedia.(Let me know if I am wrong.)
Last month the format of the member list was altered to:
allow easier editing for new members
assist members to communicate more easily (by including members talk pages)
allow members to keep up to date with each other's contributions
It had to be changed again before the May Newsletter went out to allow easier, more efficient, circulation by the ENewsBot. The Bot worked like magic last month but slightly complicated the signing up process, particularly for novice users.
Thanks
The Yorkshire Portal continues to be maintained by User:Kaly99 once again, thank you. There has been a number of suggestions on the ToDo list and this has been kept up to date too.
The football and rugby editors have to be congratulated for keeping abreast of most. if not all, of the top clubs.
User:Cyberdemon007 has made a lot of edits to North Yorkshire settlement infoboxes. Thank you.
There have been more WikiProkject Yorkshire editors on vandal patrol on watchlist , just lately. Thanks it's really good to know that you have others in support.
A big "thank you" to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed. If you patrol the recent changes regularly you "get to know" the editors and their specialities quite well.
York - B - Main problems are lack of references and the lists, also the external links section would need a major prune before a GA review.Maybe ask for peer review when these are done? Bath, Somerset is an FA and a good role model.
Yorkshire and the Humber - Start. The article has been reorganised and expanded (some sections with no text are there on the source page but are commented out at the moment). It could do with more citations.
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
Don't Forget...
Monitor Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism can be removed as quickly as possible.
Images! There is a shortage of good images in Yorkshire related articles, particularly on pages about smaller settlements. A good place to start would be the requested photographs category but please remember that there are many articles not within this category that have the same need. A good old holiday picture of The Spa, Bridlington would be a useful addition to the article.
Assessment Assess and review Assessment of Yorkshire related articles has been brought up to date recently, but needs constant maintenance.
Last but not Least... Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is in permanent need of attention. Please take a look and see what you can do. One small edit each session would make a big difference.
Hi there. I'm the editor who requested these speedys. I don't know if you think it might be an idea to back up my message on the originators talk page about creating maybe one article at a time? Oh, just noticed that Bryan Logan has been recreated Ged UK (talk) 21:05, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I think you warned the wrong editor over the vandalism at Blockland. ZX81 was reverting, not adding to the mess. ZX81 is reverting vandalism at a rather prolific rate. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Adambro. How are you? Thank you for confirming about the photos. You wrote that the photos can and probably should be uploaded to the Commons. Could you tell me who I should contact to set that process in motion? Actually, besides those three photos there are some more from the same batch (two are used in other articles and a few more that right now aren't being used in any article):
Image:Looking North on Granville St 2.jpg
Image:Stanley Theatre (1).JPG
Image:Stanley Theatre windows.JPG
Image:Stanley Theatre Sign.JPG
Image:Stanley gold-leaf.JPG
I'd like to move all of these to the Commons if possible. Thanks, just let me know what I should do. Moisejp (talk) 00:57, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Lealholm was not promoted to GA status on June 30th
WP:YORKS is a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 3509 last month to 3635 on June 29th). WP:GM has the lead in FAs. WP:YORKS is lacking in the area of GAs and falls well behind WP:LONDON. This topic was at the front of the new aims discussion and is an important issue for WP:YORKS.
Member News
There are now 47 members of WikiProject Yorkshire! A warm welcome to the 3 new members that have joined us since the June newsletter:
No users left the WikiProject this month, but 1 user was registered twice under different logins and has been consolidated.
Thanks
The Yorkshire Portal continues to be maintained by User:Kaly99 once again, thank you. User:Kaly99 would very much appreciate comments at peer review. There has been a number of suggestions on the ToDo list and this has been kept up to date too.
The football and rugby editors have to be congratulated for keeping abreast of most, if not all, of the top clubs. Also for getting Scarborough F.C. seasons to FL status during the month.
There have been even more WikiProkject Yorkshire editors on vandal patrol on watchlist. Thanks it's really good to know that you have others in support.
A big "thank you" to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed. If you patrol the recent changes regularly you "get to know" the editors and their specialities quite well.
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
Informal article viewing and editing statistics for 5 of our priority articles
Rated a B class article. Viewed 40,122 times in May, 2008. Only went below 1,000 viewings on one day, 10th, and achieved 1,600 on the 6th and the 20th. Overall total number of edits 1,818 with 46 in May, 2008.
Rated a B class article. Viewed 38,018 times in May, 2008. On 12 days there were over 1,000 viewings with a sudden peak of 4,200 on the 24th. Overall number of edits 2,269 with 88 in May, 2008.
Rated a B class article. The highest number of monthly viewings for our priority articles at 50,846 for the month of May, 2008. There were consistently over 1,000 daily viewings with a high of 2,000 on the 25th. Overall total number of edits 3,152 with 86 in May, 2008.
Rated an FA class article.Viewed 37,740 times in May, 2008 with usually over 1,000 daily viewings. There were 6 days when over 1,400 viewings were made then a low of 900 on the 10th. Overall total number of edits 2,550 with 44 in May, 2008.
Rated a GA class article and actively being worked on for FAC. Viewed 42,902 times in May, 2008. Consistently over 1,000 daily viewings with 2,000 viewings on the 12th. Overall total number of edits 2,434 with 241 in May, 2008.
Monitor Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism can be removed as quickly as possible.
Images! There is a shortage of good images in Yorkshire related articles, particularly on pages about smaller settlements. A good place to start would be the requested photographs category but please remember that there are many articles not within this category that have the same need. A good old holiday picture of The Spa, Bridlington would be a useful addition to the article.
Assessment Assess and review Assessment of Yorkshire related articles has been brought up to date recently, but needs constant maintenance.
Last but not Least... Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is in permanent need of attention. Please take a look and see what you can do. One small edit each session would make a big difference.
Delivered July 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage.
→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 12:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your message, I have now deleted this image. The user has uploaded a number of other copyright violations which makes this likely to be the same. I tried to track this done when I saw it uploaded but wasn't able to find the source so thanks for doing so. Adambro (talk) 21:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
That's fine, it's just I happened to know this Flickr User from outside of the internet, and I had been browsing his photostream on flickr when I switched to wiki and found that. Britishrailclass91 (talk) 15:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Image:Structural.gif
I recently created the image and uploaded it on wikipedia, but then read that I should have put it on the commons. So I think that I followed the instructions, but the one on wikipedia hasn't been deleted. Can you tell me if it is the way it should be, or do I need to do something else? thanks, Dwayne Reed (talk) 16:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Another un-free image
I can't help but thinking that [This] looks an awful lot like This Would you be able to delete it? Britishrailclass91 (talk) 17:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
WP:YORKS is a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 3635 last month to 3781 on July 30th). WP:GM has the lead in FAs at 24 out of a total number of 1624 articles. In the area of GAs, at 17, WP:YORKS falls behind WP:LONDON and WP:GM who each have 21.
Member News
There are now 47 members of WikiProject Yorkshire! A warm welcome to the new member that has joined us since the July newsletter:
User:Kaly99 would very much appreciate comments about Yorkshire Portal at peer review which continues to be maintained by Kaly99. Once more, thank you.
There has been a number of suggestions on the ToDo list at Yorkshire Portal and this has been kept up to date too.
The football and rugby editors have to be admired for keeping abreast of most, if not all, of the top clubs.
WikiProkject Yorkshire editors have been busy on vandal patrol at watchlist. Thanks.
A big "thank you" to all the editors who help make this WikiProject what it is; no edit goes unnoticed.
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
Article improvement
One of the aims of our project was to set up a periodic Article improvement drive. The article on our county town of York is suggested for this month. Please discuss and/or make edits to move towards WP:GA? status for our first selected article.
Please remember...
The project is now subscribed to a clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis.
Monitor Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Infoboxes Many of our articles would benefit from the addition of an appropriate infobox. Useful ones include:
The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.
References Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is always in need of attention. Please take a look and see if you can help. One small edit, such as adding a reference section and reference, to an article each session would make a big difference.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR.
Delivered August 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage.
→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 23:02, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
1906
You're looking good for someone who started contributing in 1906. ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm new to wikipedia, and seeing you're an admin, I was wondering whether you could give me some advice on what to do and what not to so on wikipedia. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks and regards Kelladam96 (talk) 14:55, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
It is nearly impossible we will ever find a source for the unit numbers on this page. The companys never seem to publish anything official for which units they have. It is well known between everyone which units CrossCountry have and can say that it is correct what is on that page. Maybe there is something on the DFT website.Year1989 (talk) 13:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
There won't be anything on the DfT's website and if an reliable source can't be cited then simply the information shouldn't be included. I can't consider it appropriate to say that "everyone [knows] which units CrossCountry have". Adambro (talk) 13:15, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
The thing is on British Rail Class 220 it states the actual unit numbers and says that they are currently with CrossCountry in many places. Isnt this just the same as stating it on the CrossCountry page? Also there are other pages such as Northern Rail and Midland Mainline to name a few which state which unit numbers they have/had. If we are to go with what you say these should be sorted under the same policy too. Year1989 (talk) 13:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
I have, and will continue to, work to remove any information which lacks citations where appropriate and where I've not been able to find a reliable source. My removal of unit numbers, where not supported by the citation of a reliable source, has not been limited to the CrossCountry article. I will in time deal with any similar problems on the other articles you highlight but I do of course hope that others will be doing so also. Thanks for finding a source for the number of units that CrossCountry operate. Adambro (talk) 14:10, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for voting in this poll. However, as another user rightly pointed out, there are other stations with inconsistent names. I've started new poll, and would welcome your input. Thanks, JRawle (Talk) 12:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
WP:YORKS is a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 3781 last month to 4005 on August 27th). WP:GM has the lead in FAs at 25 out of a total number of 1664 articles. In the area of GAs, at 17, WP:YORKS falls behind WP:GM with 27 and WP:LONDON with 22.
To bring all other top priority articles (currently 15 with 2 at FA) to at least Good article status
To set up a weekly or monthly selected article improvement drive
To produce a regular news letter for circulation to members
Yorkshire Portal
The Yorkshire portal helps people navigate through the content related to Yorkshire. The highlighted content is displayed randomly and includes -
Did you Knows
Articles
Biographies
Pictures
Panoramas
Any additions to these would be great. The portal is being prepared for featured portal candidacy so help meeting the criteria, for example, copy-editing or suggestions for new content sections such as Selected anniversaries, On this day, or In the news would be appreciated.
Priority Articles
The top priority articles that have been identified to date are as follows -
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
Please remember...
The project is now subscribed to a clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis.
Monitor Use the watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Infoboxes Many of our articles would benefit from the addition of an appropriate infobox.
The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.
References Please remember that the list of stubs needing expansion is always in need of attention. Please take a look and see if you can help. One small edit, such as adding a reference section and reference, to an article each session would make a big difference.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR.
Delivered September 2008 by ENewsBot. If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add two *'s by your username on the Project Mainpage.
→ Please direct all enquiries to the WikiProject talk page. → This newsletter/release was delivered by ENewsBot · 10:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Were you aware of the vast consensus on ANI that Pigsonthewing not be unblocked until such time as he fully complies with the community's desire that he not bring up three year old feuds? The section, (which I will be bringing up this action) is hereSirFozzie (talk) 22:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Moreover, Andy's userpage looked like this during his 1-year absence so Adambro's statement "This text however, has existed untouched for the duration of Andy's ban" is wrong. Occuli (talk) 00:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
SirFozzie, yes, I'm aware of that discussion. Occuli, ahh, sorry about my mistake, it doesn't change the main basis for my unblock however. Adambro (talk) 09:23, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps, but your action does demonstrate poor judgement for the reasons I (among others) have noted at the community discussion. I think you need to explain your actions there and what made you even contemplate that you had authority over the community when you were fully aware of the views expressed there. Ncmvocalist (talk) 09:40, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Broken coordinates
With reference to your recent unblock, would you look into his most recent contributions and his response to comments on these [1]. -- User:Docu
In response to your question on my talk page, the diff above refers to a section further up on the talk page back then, see User_talk:Pigsonthewing#Coordinates. If I followed his reasoning, I think he is trying to explain that his conversion was in fact a justified reversion of edits of mine, edits that were repairing or fixing the coordinates. He seems convinced that it remains for other to clean up after him .. -- User:Docu
I'm not sure what the issue here is, why you've raised this with me, nor what you wish me to say or do about it. Clearly if he is making changes then he needs to make sure these changes work and don't impact on other aspects of a page but this should be obvious to all. Adambro (talk) 20:52, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Rockpool kayaks logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
.gif)
and uploaded it on wikipedia, but then read that I should have put it on the commons. So I think that I followed the instructions, but the one on wikipedia hasn't been deleted. Can you tell me if it is the way it should be, or do I need to do something else? thanks, Dwayne Reed (talk) 16:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}