User talk:Cliché Online

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Bluebasset.jpeg /Archive 1 (August 2006 pt.1) /Archive 2 (August 2006 pt.2-May 2007) /Archive 3 (June 2007-December 2007) /Archive 4 (2008) /Archive 5 (2009)

Contents

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Cliché Online. You have new messages at ChimpanzeeUK's talk page.
Message added 14:17, 13 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Chimpanzee - User | Talk | Contribs 14:17, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Cliché Online. You have new messages at ChimpanzeeUK's talk page.
Message added 14:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Chimpanzee - User | Talk | Contribs 14:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Motto[edit]

Good job creating the motto page, I didn't even know there was that much data on it! Thanks for the good work filling that hole of info.- J.Logan`t: 07:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, don't mention it. I've done my part, now it's up to the other wikipedians to complete the article. Cliché Online (talk) 05:44, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Personal comments in article Malta[edit]

Please don't add personal comments to articles, or underline anything. Use fact tags if you want a source. I've replaced one of your comments with a tag, the other I just deleted because it was already sourced. Dougweller (talk) 05:38, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Military history of France[edit]

I said nothing about when Franco-German enmity started, and if you were looking for an answer, 1806 wouldn't be the right year anyway. You can find the roots for the future rivalry all the way in the early Middle Ages with the division of Charlemagne's empire. And the more modern aspects of their stern opposition to one another trace their history to the Thirty Years War, in which Turenne burned Southern Germany to the ground and made France the devil incarnate in German eyes for the next three centuries. But the main point is that Franco-German rivalry has absolutely nothing to do with the sentence under question. It's a matter of pure chronology, and you completely destroy that when you start talking about the War of the Fourth Coalition, which happened over six decades earlier from the Franco-Prussian War.UberCryxic (talk) 01:28, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi, of course the historical fuzz started at the division of the frank empire in 843. your "german" perspective is not the same as the french perspective. anti-french resentment of german queen Louise of Mecklenburg-Strelitz against the french (the french wiki article will give you an hint of what i mean) led prussia to attack france who defeated it. from my position that's the same as when the Ems Dispatch angered the french against the german. they were the attacker and were defeated. in both case the victor defended itself against the aggressor and humiliated him. that's french-german enmity from my POV. Cliché Online (talk) 02:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't see how anything you said relates to my statement. The perspective isn't German or French; both sides would easily agree that their rivalry predates the Napoleonic Wars. But again, regardless of when their rivalry first surfaced in history, it has nothing to do with that sentence. That sentence does not talk about Franco-German rivalry. It only mentions the Franco-Prussian War as an event in and of itself, not in relation to some other larger concept. You're reading more into it than you should.UberCryxic (talk) 04:41, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm reading here and there that the french were humilated by the german in 1870-1871 like History_of_the_Armée_de_l'Air_(1909-1942)#The_early_years_of_French_military_aviation_until_1914 "The French collective memory of the humiliating defeat of the army at the hands of the Prussians during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-1871 was still very fresh, and France was preparing to face Germany again.", (a recurring claim without source but that's a different matter). also nobody says the german were previously humialated when napoleon I defeated them as prussians. it reads like it all started there with a french defeat, but that's lies or propaganda as you wish. humiliating defeat was what driven hitler in 1940 and france in 1914 but also the said prussian queen in the napoleonic battle of iena auerstadt. i'm repeating myself so forget it. Cliché Online (talk) 04:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyright violations[edit]

I've deleted image [1] as it is a blatant copyright violation of here. Taking an image from another site, resizing it slightly and changing the colour pattern does not make it your original work, it is misrepresentation and copyright infringement. Canterbury Tail talk 13:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

how do you know this old map is copyrighted?! Cliché Online (talk) 13:27, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Because all maps are copyrighted unless they are specifically released as otherwise. And how do you mean old, it was created post WW2. Canterbury Tail talk 13:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
i'm gonna ask them, because this site hosts archives for educational purpose. Cliché Online (talk) 13:48, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Point here is you passed off someone else's work as your own. This a formal warning for uploading copyrighted images, making false claims on the origins of images and deliberately mislabelling uploaded files. Canterbury Tail talk 13:54, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Yakuza 3 false claims[edit]

Hello. I am not a new user, and I can not let you get away with your edits. You are making unsourced claims, the level on which the cuts are made have not been made public yet. It can very well be that the dating is only kept in the way that the player is called by the hostesses.

What you write are mere assumptions.

Secondly, your ironic tone of writing is unfit for an encyclopedia. Your edits read like you are a die-hard-fan wanting to denounce any criticism to the game, claiming an established source as Kotaku was wrong with no proof. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.138.159.78 (talk) 11:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

hey this no un unverified claim, kotaku just have posted a update did you saw it? romancing is still there, there is no romancing without cabaret, i finished the game kotaku didn' even played it all they want is getting hits and ad-money even though it includes misinformation Cliché Online (talk) 11:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)


Okay, I did not read the update; yet you must take care not to write in a tone that seems like bashing. After all the cabaret management is still gone, as are Shogi, Mahjong and the quiz. The dating is only one part. When writing for Wikipedia you have to do so in a neutral manner, else it will be dismissed as fanboy talk and deleted anyway.

--62.138.159.78 (talk) 11:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

you are right :) maybe i was pissed off because they are ruining the game's launch with their false rumors. Cliché Online (talk) 12:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
i'm gonna check the primary sources to rewrite that article section about what is actually cut and what is not Cliché Online (talk) 12:04, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
hey i checked the sega blog it seems all the said fans are after a romancing game. they will not buy it without the hostess like it was a romancing game. there might be some xbox flamers as with the gran turismo/forza 2 case. when a forza dev was caught trolling gt last year. :) Cliché Online (talk) 12:09, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

That´s no big deal, just make it better. ;) Oh, about the prostitution thing; there was no need to delete that for all western versions either, as prostitution is legal in most places outside the USA; and the legality is no issue at all, as beating up people and shooting them is illegal everywhere yet causes no problem with the law if it is shown in games. This does not justify a cut especially for the PAL-version.

The problems with a too short localization time seems like a fishy excuse as well; with only subtitles being translated anyway this should not take a professional translator working for a big company such as Sega more than a few day. All pretty dubious.

Actually with the amount of text the hostess section takes up, a professional translator working at the rather brisk pace of 5000-7500 characters a day translated, it would take approximately 6-8 weeks to translate. KenFroanlad (talk) 14:59, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I am among those who have decided to wait a while to see if the content may be released as DLC. Personally, I spent so much time with the now missing features in the prequel that I am not sure about how much fun I would have missing these things. It was unwise to cut it out because Yakuza is only for "nerds" in the west, and these people mostly prefer things with original voices and uncut. Cutting out reduces even the small fanbase more...But that´s just a personal sidenote. ;)

--62.138.159.78 (talk) 12:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

point received. well there's still something i wanted to ask you, where the hell did you found the shogi thing? all (official) i read is 99% of the japanese is still there except for the club hostess Cliché Online (talk) 12:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The Shogi-thing I read somewhere when browsing Sega´s official US-forums. However, I just browsed and can not say for sure if this was said by a mod there or just a misunderstanding by the fans based on some article...there are several threads on the cuts on the Sega US boards already, so I did not have the time to read them all from start to end yet.

--62.138.159.78 (talk) 12:29, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

got it, so the western release section should be rewritten without the kotaku trivia and plus the rushed version with 99% since this is it the official statement. Cliché Online (talk) 12:33, 25 February 2010 (UTC)


Missing trophies isn't proof that the content was cut, only that the trophies are cut. While I think it's likely that the content in question (Mahjong/Shogi) was indeed cut, it's also completely possible that only the trophies were cut and the content remains. We'll find out in the next day or two, but until then it's irresponsible to state it so matter-of-factly.KenFroanlad (talk) 14:55, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

There is no question that hostesses and Answer X Answer are cut. However there has been no official statement on mahjong or shogi. Until there is, we can't be sure of anything other than the trophies are cut. The trophies may have been cut because Sega felt it would be too hard for most western players to learn the games in order to get a trophy. I don't believe this is the case (as the trophies are actually quite easy to obtain, even for complete novices) it still remains a distinct possibility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KenFroanlad (talkcontribs) 15:06, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Reply[edit]

Hi, I am sure, English is my native language :) A lot of the European languages handle speech marks differently. Also, I'm sure I haven't misinterpreted the quote, the spokesman was talking about upcoming promotion for the main game, not DLC. 79.79.3.115 (talk) 21:29, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

thanks for the tip, yes you're right about upcoming talk but you're wrong about extra dlc, check this. Cliché Online (talk) 21:31, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Ferrari Challenge: Trofeo Pirelli[edit]

Hello. Other articles are not relevant to edits. Gran Turismo 2 does not mention any individual car, and its a PlayStation game, does that mean the Ferrari article shouldn't either? Sega GT is only a single paragraph, should the Ferrari article be a single paragraph? I removed the lists per item 6 of WP:GAMECRUFT - "Lists of gameplay items, weapons, or concepts". In a racing game, the cars and tracks can be considered "items". Lists generally don't add anything to articles. Please try to be less aggressive in your comments. Thanks! Fin© 16:43, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I explained all my edits in the summary, please do not revert them as "random". Thanks! Fin© 17:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
random is what they are. your so called "edits" are only random removal of indormation about a software you don't have a clue. they are irrelevant. Cliché Online (talk) 17:38, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello. Please don't be aggressive. I'm editing the article to try and improve it, of course. You imply in your talk page comment that sourced information should not be removed - this is incorrect, if information is inappropriate (or whatever, it clutters, it's too detailed etcetc) it should be removed, regardless of whether its sourced. You also seem to imply that I want a barebones article - this is incorrect, why would you think so? I'm simply removing what I consider to be excessive detail, there's still plenty of information in the article. If nobody cares about my "agenda" (I don't have one, by the way), then why are you intent on branding me as trying to destroy PS3 articles? I note you do the same to other editors you disagree with. Of course WP:GAMECRUFT does not specify cars. Does it specify weapon attachments? Types of ammo? Shield types? Weapons? Just because something isn't there doesn't mean it's not included. Also, if you could be a bit clearer on talk page comments, that'd be good, I have a hard time understanding what you mean (though if english isn't your first language, that's cool too) Thanks! Fin© 17:46, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello again. I've looked at the Forza Motorsport article - it seems ok (no excessive detail), much the same shape the Ferrari article is at the moment (with my edits). Thanks for getting me to take a look! Thanks! Fin© 17:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
I've just thought that maybe you can't see my edit summary, which is why you called the edits random? Here it is just in case - "reader can go to supercar challenge article to read about it; can only be one native res; patch detail nn; trim tracks". Thanks! Fin© 17:49, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Em, have you looked at my edit? There's more to it than cutting down the number of tracks - instead of saying "There's track X, Y and Z in country 1, track D E and F in country 2" etc, it now just gives a short summary of the famous tracks. I don't see the problem. Also, you're at your WP:3RR limit (and I'm coming up on it fast). Thanks! Fin© 17:55, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
"PlayStation 3 only" is a peacock phrase, and its unnecessary - if people want to read about the followup game, they can go to the article. Also, games can only have one native resolution. The game is rendered at whatever (1080p in Ferrari's case), and then is upscaled or downscaled (downscaled in Ferrari) to suit the TV it's running on. This is the reason that HD games can run at any HD resolution and any SD resolution - its based on scaling, not the game having multiple res's. Thanks! Fin© 17:59, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
*sigh* No, I haven't passed 3RR, first edit, R1, R2, R3. That's three reversions, which is the limit. Thanks! Fin© 18:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

ANI[edit]

Hello. I've brought up your general conduct and breach of 3RR at WP:ANI. Thanks! Fin© 18:12, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

good i could report your own conduct and obvious agenda pushing. Cliché Online (talk) 18:15, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
If you do believe I have an "agenda", I think the conflict of interest noticeboard might be the place to bring it up? If you want to bring up my conduct, the administrator's noticeboard is probably the best place. Thanks! Fin© 18:20, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
of course that's what you are doing otherless the xbox360 article you are editing would look like the ps3 articles i edit which is not the case. thanks for wasting my time. Cliché Online (talk) 18:32, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit warring on Ferrari Challenge: Trofeo Pirelli[edit]

Regardless of how you spin it, both you and Falcon are edit-warring on this article. Rather than blocking outright, I'm giving you both a warning; you would be well-advised to cease editing the article for now and instead seek outside input to resolve your disagreement. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 18:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

i've answered on the incident board talk page. this user upsets me because he makes me waste my time, i spend hours bringing infos, he comes in and removes them just because he had decided. :| Cliché Online (talk) 18:29, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Um, I'm not sure what you mean by "answered on the incident board talk page"; I don't see any messages from you there at all.
By the way, regarding messages like this, please see What vandalism is not before frivolously accusing other editors of vandalism. Content disagreements and edit warring are not vandalism. I am not defending Falcon's edit warring, but playing the "vandalism" card against other edits is never conducive to discussion. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 18:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
must be lost session with my browser, i've just added a sumup to my previous answer to the noticeboard. Cliché Online (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
I still don't see anything. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 18:58, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
yes lost session i have problem with my bowser. anyway i'm leaving now. Cliché Online (talk) 19:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

"Vandalism" on FFXIII[edit]

Hello. While I'd usually ignore your unfounded accusations of vandalism, I'm curious what you meant by my vandalism to the Final Fantasy XIII article - care you explain? Thanks! Fin© 21:49, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

unfounded? you blatantly removed contents about the xbox360 version being 576p while you were the one who added 576p native resolution to the ps3 in the first place -when you thought it was the ps3 version-. ironically enough this is actually the xbox360 version which is 576p so you have removed that data from the article. blatant. Cliché Online (talk) 21:58, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I removed it from the infobox here because it was unsourced. I then added 576p as the Xbox resolution in this edit once I found a source, but in my haste, I forgot to add the quantifier (Xbox 360). As it was added after (PlayStation 3), I don't think I can be accused of thinking it was for the PS3 version - please don't assume you know what I'm thinking. Also, I urge you to read WP:VANDAL, and probably WP:GOODFAITH too - I note you've be warned about it above. Thanks! Fin© 22:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
No this is not the firt time you act like this removing contents you don't like, your vandalism is obvious and has been reported. you always find lame excuses to pursue your vandalism and follow your agenda. you have removed the xbox 576p claiming there was no source while it was you the one who added source for 576p, so there was a source, but you've removed the whole info. now stop lying i'm sick of your excuses for your blatant vandalism get off of my talk page! Cliché Online (talk) 22:13, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I removed 576p because there was no source accompanying it - I'm fairly sure it's a policy of Wikipedia that any unsourced information can be challenged and removed. Once I found a source I trusted (the next day Digital Foundry did a piece on it), I readded 576p with the source attached. To say I should have left it because a source I trusted would appear in the future is, frankly, absolutely ridiculous. Thanks! Fin© 22:23, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I reviewed the edits and they were not vandalism, so you can drop it. For further information, I responded to you at User talk:Rjanag#Report xboxfanboy vandal. Cliche, you were given ample opportunity to voice your concerns at the ANI thread and you never did. I suggest you review the policies What vandalism is not, Assume good faith, and Wikipedia is not a battleground. If you're unable to contribute constructively without turning every little thing into a battle with Falcon, then some form of mediation may become necessary. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 23:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

i told you the reason back then, browser cache issue. Cliché Online (talk) 05:02, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Quantrum theory logo.PNG[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Quantrum theory logo.PNG. 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 will not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.
  • If you received 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 somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 19:11, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

May 2010[edit]

Information.svg Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:KrakatoaKatie/Archive 8. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 15:25, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Operation Valentine (1948)[edit]

Mind voicing your views? Cheers, SGGH ping! 16:58, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ryu ga gotoku 3 GTMF2009 slideshow07.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ryu ga gotoku 3 GTMF2009 slideshow07.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) 05:46, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Hmong_people#biased_secret_war[edit]

Please see Talk:Hmong_people#biased_secret_war WhisperToMe (talk) 08:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:European motto unite dans la diversite may 5 2000 bruxels (Small).jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:European motto unite dans la diversite may 5 2000 bruxels (Small).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) 05:36, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

File:European motto unite dans la diversite may 5 2000 bruxels (Small).jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:European motto unite dans la diversite may 5 2000 bruxels (Small).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. Rettetast (talk) 10:24, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Hanoingayve01.jpg[edit]

Copyright-problem.svg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Hanoingayve01.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:08, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Mainichi issho psp.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mainichi issho psp.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. RJaguar3 | u | t 04:26, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Ps store remoteplay.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ps store remoteplay.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --RJaguar3 | u | t 05:12, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Arcades and "counterthrusting"?[edit]

See [2] Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:00, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Non-Free rationale for File:LST-490 Vulcain.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:LST-490 Vulcain.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under Non-Free content criteria but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a Non-Free rationale.

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Non-Free rationale for File:Locoloco-prepaidcard HK.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Locoloco-prepaidcard HK.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under Non-Free content criteria but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a Non-Free rationale.

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Moongazelugerfire.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Moongazelugerfire.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:01, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Screenshot of Weekly Toro Station news 003.JPG[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Screenshot of Weekly Toro Station news 003.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. Skier Dude (talk) 03:24, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Mainichi issho psp.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mainichi issho psp.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. —danhash (talk) 13:55, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo vidzone.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Logo vidzone.png. 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. Skier Dude (talk) 03:47, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Ryu ga gotoku 2 figure.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ryu ga gotoku 2 figure.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Yakuza 3 Completion[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Yakuza 3 Completion has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 23:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:LST-490 Vulcain.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:LST-490 Vulcain.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:06, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Wildsevenref.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Wildsevenref.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:41, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Adhoc Party for PlayStation Portable[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Adhoc Party for PlayStation Portable has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is a Sony product that doesn't appear to have garnered any independent coverage. Primary source issues were raised in 2008 and if notability hasn't been established since then I don't have much hope that it ever will be.

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. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 02:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

File source problem with File:LouisLePrinceFirstFilmEver.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:LouisLePrinceFirstFilmEver.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Adhoc party for psp cover.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Adhoc party for psp cover.png. 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) 08:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Adhoc party Room chat.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Adhoc party Room chat.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) 08:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)