User talk:Frous

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

Welcome!

Hello, Frous, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Acalamari 22:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Nation (university)[edit]

In regards to this edit, Nations at Scottish universities is a redlink. Drmies (talk) 20:51, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:PROD[edit]

See that page to find out. JDDJS (talk) 06:01, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Copyrighted material[edit]

Hi, please do not insert copyrighted material that was previously cleaned up, as you did in Born This Way (song). If you think "ahmedfarhat had some good stuff there" then start a talk page discussion about it but please don't undo cleanup. Regards Hekerui (talk) 20:05, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

? Sorry, I think I'm not following you. What copyrighted material did I exactly add there? -- Frous (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
The material I had removed was copied from a Billboard article. Your revert inserted it back in. Hekerui (talk) 20:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Gotcha. Could that same info still be there, though rewritten? -- Frous (talk) 20:10, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes, if content is reformulated in own words and not closely paraphrased. That is often a tightrope walk with this little source info and we also have to be careful not to go into unnecessary detail (though whatever that is should be the subject of discussion). Best Hekerui (talk) 20:14, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Song chart moves[edit]

I have reverted several of your song chart page moves because you moved lists that had proper nouns in the name. Not only does Japan have two charting systems (the Oricon and the Japan Hot 100), the Oricon isn't the official one. Similarly, "Dutch Top 40", "Ultrapop 50", "Ultratop 40", and "New Zealand Top 50" are all proper nounds and you should not have moved their pages.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:13, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

K. Sorry for not checking the policies. -- Frous (talk) 21:14, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

iTunes[edit]

I didn't add the information about iTunes... however I would argue that selling 1 million copies in 5 days is a big achievement especially as MTV notes its down to record sales through iTunes. — Lil_niquℇ 1 [talk] 22:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

BTW i've reverted your edits this time, about MTV reports on sales. Per my understanding of WP:Record charts we're not allowed to list individual retailer charts. However noting that the song is the best selling/fastest selling single on iTunes is quite different matter do you not think? Additionally MTV is not explicitly saying that the 1m copies sold came exclusively from iTunes... and I don't see it as a NPOV issue as the single is/was available to buy from other retailers. — Lil_niquℇ 1 [talk] 22:31, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

STOP[edit]

DO not revert my edits. Telling what songs kept BTW from the top is essential. Does the question, "WHO THE HECK KEPT GAGA FROM #1?!?!", not come to mind when looking at its UK peak. FYI it's been 2 weeks, chances are it is gonna stay at #3. iTunes sales are already declining. :( --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 00:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I do know it has been at #3 for two weeks, but come on: only TWO WEEKS?! :D That doesn't make a case yet for mentioning the other two singles, if "BTW" stays at number 3 longer, well then of course, you could reconsider. That's just hyping about the charts positions and makes no sense.
Anyways...if mentioning the competitors the case for all singles that debute at #3 (or such) and then stay there? Right... "Only this and that kept X from #1" does not represent a neutral point of view, because (at least for me) by emphasizing its competitors the text sounds like it was supposed to peak at number one. -- Frous (talk) 00:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
I've copyedited the section to remove the POV issues but keep the information in a way which I think you'll both be happy? — Lil_niquℇ 1 [talk] 00:39, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Template:Certification Table Entry[edit]

Thanks for correcting my error. --Muhandes (talk) 07:59, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) -- Frous (talk) 08:00, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Repost of Category:Number-one albums in Finland[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Number-one albums in Finland requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template {{hang on}} underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 05:39, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Seili (album)[edit]

Hi Frous. Can you please explain how one can tell from [1] that the album made Quintuple Platinum, rather than Triple Platinum? I know the award threshold is 20,000 for Platinum, but this is not enough as a source. For instance, the eponymous album Anna Puu has only Double Platinum, regardless of selling 75,000, see [2]. Is there perhaps another reliable source that can vouch for that? Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 11:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Seems that the d******s at Musiikkituottajat are too lazy with mentioning all the certifications in the pages of the individual recordings. :D (Hate that...) Anyways, the certifications page[3] is quite clear that they award every 20,000+ sale with a platinum. I.e. you need these two sources to verify the certifications. -- Frous (talk) 08:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
I've by now probably reviewed and cited several hundred albums for certifications, as I'm trying to standardize this. We are very careful to cite certifications only from reliable sources and not from original research. We simply can't say what was awarded without a clear source. I gave a simple example above with Anna Puu where if you divided you would get triple platinum, where only double platinum was awarded. I have some other examples if you are interested, where we actually contacted the IFPI (or equivalent) and they verified that they did not award certification although sales were sufficient, from some other reasons, which justified this approach of not guessing but using a reliable source. Is there maybe a different source which can be used? Was this quintuple platinum maybe mentioned in some newspaper? It seems quite an achievement. --Muhandes (talk) 08:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
I just realized Anna Puu's Sahara would be Platinum if we just went by numbers. Again showing we can't guess on ourselves. --Muhandes (talk) 08:53, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Well, I have no other sources for certifications that exceed the "double" except for what they themselves claim to certify.[4] The IFPI certifications list mentions the triple and "etc." (as one can see, Seili has crossed the 20,000+ limit five times, hence, "quintuple platinum" as I have categorized it) but the IFPI pages of the individual recordings mention only the certs up to the "double" after which there's only "multi". So. They give ambiguous info. That being the case, should we then just simply change the certifications — i.e. triples, quadruples, quintuples, etc. to multis? If not, could you please add the certifications list ({{Cite web|url=http://www.ifpi.fi/tilastot/myontamisrajat|title=TILASTOT – Kultalevyjen myöntämisrajat|publisher=ifpi.fi, Musiikkituottajat – IFPI Finland|language=Finnish}}) to the template? I have no frigging chance to add it without messing up the template... :D -- Frous (talk) 09:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
I think we should say exactly what we see. If there is no way to ascertain if this is 3 or more we should say "3+" and categorize under "triple or more platinum". I will add that option to the template. By the way, I notice quite a list of numbers at the bottom of [5], is that not the historical levels of the certification thresholds? --Muhandes (talk) 09:14, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh! It is! :) Didn't notice, was too busy writing the current thresholds... x) Yeah. ("Pitkäsoitto" is another term for what they call an album. The dates mean that "as of this date the limits are the following"; kulta is gold, platina is platinum, kaksoisplatina is double-platinum, kolmoisplatina is triple-platinum (the two previous are "more Finnish" terms for double and triple), kotimaiset albumit is albums by Finnish artists, ulkomaiset albumit is foreign albums.) -- Frous (talk) 09:22, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Musiikkituottajat – IFPI Finland[edit]

Hi again. Not totally unrelated to the above question, I'm happy you wrote Musiikkituottajat – IFPI Finland, at one point I was intending to write such article for all IFPI members. Would you mind adding a section about certifications? This would be especially interesting if certifications changed over the years. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 16:09, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for adding that. Is there any evidence that the certification thresholds were ever different? --Muhandes (talk) 08:13, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
I remember that the limits have been dropped over time or smth, but I can't find any sources atm. -- Frous (talk) 08:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Lady Gaga song page moves[edit]

Regarding your edits here and here: Cutting and pasting content from one page to another is not an acceptable way to move an article because it separates the article from its edit history. Page moves should be done using the move tab at the top of the page, if possible. However, in this case--because you added an edit on top of the redirect at You and I (Lady Gaga song), an admin's intervention will now be required to move the page to that title--the only way to move the page is through the requested move process. And this, if you pursue it, would probably be a good thing, as the issue would get settled through a thorough discussion.--ShelfSkewed Talk 22:53, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Don't ever move a page again unless you have consensus to do so. I've come to you in the past concerning this issue and now you've done it again.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:04, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. — Legolas (talk2me) 17:50, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Re: Born Ths Way (Polish chart)[edit]

No worries. I was just about to mention WP:GOODCHARTS. SnapSnap 17:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Dutch 40[edit]

In this edit, you were confusing the week number with the position. The website is pretty confusing.—Kww(talk) 21:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I used this source.[6] (Dutch Top 40, the chart that incorporates airplay also.) The positions that were there, they were not those Dutch Top 40 positions. I suppose lots of editors are not aware of the fact that there are three official charts and they just write Dutch Top 40 and source the position with dutchcharts.nl — which is Single Top 100, a different chart. -- Frous (talk) 21:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
I understand what source you used. Note that, for example, the "29" next to "Hometown Glory" means that it peaked on the chart in week 29 of 2009. If you click the link labeled "Hometown Glory" and look at the peaks, you will see the chart position was 25. In the edit in question, you replaced the correct peak (25) with the week number (29). Like I said, the website is confusing, and a lot of people make the mistake that you made.—Kww(talk) 01:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

The Monster Ball Tour[edit]

Refuted a reliable source with an edit summary stating, "This is not her first tour, bb is bs'ing us". When the source does not mention anything regarding first tour. The article states "debut headlining tour by a solo artist". Headlining being the key word. That is why your edit was reverted. Itsbydesign (talk) 01:51, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

According to verifiability policy, there are multiple sources they say it, so it must be so. It is not only the Billboard article that is confirming this achievement, it's just the only one that editor is trying to use. I am 100% sure you have to background or understanding of the touring industry and how it all works, thus you are really just stating your opinion, which is original research (which is not allowed by Wikipedia). You challenged the article, thus you now have the burden to find proof to refute it. Meaning, find multiple sources that will agree with your opinion. Itsbydesign (talk) 02:44, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Your edit was reverted based upon your edit summary, not whether I agreed with the statement or not. Which is the original question that was asked, Why did I revert your edit. It appears you've found the answer to your proposal so I won't dive into this further.Itsbydesign (talk) 17:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Radio add[edit]

I think I need to explain to you what this term means. Now songs are not "released" to radio exclusively, because radio usually can play any damn song they like based on their PDs and RJ's choice. The term "radio add" here means the date when the song was sent to radio for exclusive high airplay. This term is more formal and normally the airplay starting after the adds date is counted by Nielsen BDS while forming the Hot 100 Airplay. You got it? — Legolas (talk2me) 15:39, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Yup, thanks. -- Frous (talk) 15:42, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

GAGA[edit]

Hello there! Just come to make myself known, it's nice to see another Little Monster on here--David (talk) 19:42, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Maijavilkkumaadingoja.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Maijavilkkumaadingoja.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 Dude2 (talk) 03:24, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

List of best-selling music artists in Finland[edit]

Do you really think it is appropriate to add this link to every artist in this category? Do we then add a link to every similar list for every artist from every country? Conceivably each page would then become an enormous see also list. Would you consider self reverting those edits? Heiro 16:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, got bit carried away. For Finnish artists that's appropriate at least, I guess... I'll revert. -- Frous (talk) 16:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
I agree for Finnish artist it would be appropriate, but not all of the others, just too many lol. Cheers. Ps, I removed a few already, but then saw the volume of additions and decided to discuss it with you. Heiro 16:35, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

RE: Finnish parliamentary election 2011[edit]

Thanks. but per WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS thats not really grounds for removal. But since the 2 of us are split we can wait for a 3O on the talkg page?Lihaas (talk) 08:47, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

wo, i wasnt getting aggressive with my response. I just said the BOLD addition (which was AGF) was reverted, and per WP:BRD it needs discussion and consensus first to readd. (which we are working on, and on consensus forthcoming (ie- someone to split the difference between 2 people which could be a war) wed keep what is suggested)
the see also was overlink. see also's are used for links that dont fit in the page but are tangiently related. that link is already on the apage. you added it a few days ago. I added a "+" to seperate the different reasons and removals.
Lets continue discussion on the talk page and i think we can solve this civil-lyLihaas (talk) 13:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
woops, edit conflict. im going back to put your edits back in. dont edit for 10 mions lest we dit conflict again
There was a page for it, i cant remember now. But it must be linkable from one of the guiedline pages. WP:(something)(Lihaas (talk) 11:50, 24 June 2011 (UTC)).
Cool. although that 3O is better i think?
all stuff is good except the govt formatgion stuff b/c thats not a content issue, its a layout issue to keep the page tidy and being too lon. i think that issue is whethe to go on the finnish parliamnt page o the kaitenen cabine page. (which i dont mind either way)Lihaas (talk) 12:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
the history page. its only 108k now so manageeable but if it expands by much more well have to split again. weve already split twice.
but feel free to add the fovt formation stuff to the relevant page.(Lihaas (talk) 13:39, 24 June 2011 (UTC)).
i was like that too when i first came, but its not gone. all the info is saved here on wiki[edia through the history tab. copy+paste (its what i do when old info removed and needed baclk)(Lihaas (talk) 08:24, 25 June 2011 (UTC)).
I don t want to g4t into an edit war. ive explained to you mroe than ocne, as a new editor it was AGF, that your BOLD additions were challenged and th eonus then lies on you to get consensus per BRD. somethign which has not been given ont he talk page and the discussion is still ongoing. If you dont get consensus you cannot kep reinserting the ocne-bold edit against the stabel-version. Consensus is expected to make changes, make additions, the onus is on the person making the editLihaas (talk) 13:47, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
As a new editor you have been explainedmultiple times and nicely that a. not to resort to NPA (good that you have stoppeD) and to seek consensus BEFORE assdding back yet you insist on putting in your version without consensus. kindly refrain from doing so till consensus is fgarnered.Lihaas (talk) 14:03, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I am not going to xplain to you time and time again. If you dont believe your can ask anyone on WP that the BOLD/AGF edit when challenged (whatever the challenge the onus is then on the editor to BRD consensus. It is then added back when and only when thta editor has cponsensius and NOT what he deems worthy of minor or major or whathaveyou. when there is an arguement the stable version of the page remains pending discussion.
as for the link you show, i never sai d there was consensus there. just the oppositie in fact. you are the newer editor and seemingly anaware. i tried nicely to explain but instead of seekign discussion you continue to maintain your newer changes are right. This is the last of the talk page messages/warnings to oyou. get the consensus on the talk page or it stays out! (incidentally, it is getting deadly hard to assume AGF at this point)Lihaas (talk) 21:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011[edit]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Finnish parliamentary election, 2011. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Lihaas (talk) 14:35, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

If you have a problme in adhering to WP:Civilityu then wikipedia is not the palce to be. Suggest you calm down and learn to communicate in a more rationale matter. This is the 2nd time youve been told.
And regardless of whtehr you sdeem somethign to be a waste of time if you dont get consensus when its challenged it will NOT beon the page and dont edito war over it tiehr. (both guidelines what haev already been shown to you)
This is thw last time im going to communicate till you improve ythe CIVIL level of communication,(Lihaas (talk) 09:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)).

Maija Vilkkumaa Assessment Request[edit]

I have formally added your June, 2011 assessment request for the Maija Vilkkumaa article from the WikiProject Biography Talk page to the WikiProject Assessment Request List. --TommyBoy (talk) 06:21, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Seili GA Review[edit]

Hi i'm writing to inform you that I picked up your nominee, Seili for GA review. I listed several issues that must be fixed before I can continue. You must fix the issues within (7) days or I am required to quick-fail the article and I really hate having to do that. So get those done ASAP and i'll finish the review. Happy editing! TRLIJC19 (talk) 19:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Working on it. -- Frous (talk) 19:44, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Seili GA Review Pass[edit]

Congrats! I completed the review and gave it it's well deserved GA status. Great job on the article and fixing the issues. I strongly encourage you to review an article yourself. It's great WP experience. Also, continue to improve the article to eventually nominate it for featured article status! You never know, I might end up being the reviewer. Ha! Happy editing! TRLIJC19 (talk) 00:08, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

List of best-selling music artists[edit]

Information.png I have reverted your edit because the figures for Finland within the sources you provided do not add up to 116,497. Since this was the second time you inserted incorrect certified figures for Finland, I'd like to explain something to you. We are only to insert figures that certifications represent, and the total-figure that certifications support for Lady Gaga is 79,453. The 32,922 stated on here for The Fame Monster is a sales-figure not a certified-sales-figure. "The Fame Monster" will become 2x Platinum when it reaches 40,000 units. The same goes for 4,122 for "Born This Way" single, it will become a Gold-certification when it reaches 5,000. See the certification-levels here. Lastly, I don't know why you added 32,922 on the top of 25,358, you only need to add 7,564 (32,922 - 25,358=7,564) on the top of 25,358. Otherwise, that is counting it twice. Again, we are to insert figures states for certifications, which are these only.--Harout72 (talk) 06:07, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I was also wondering what IFPI Finland means by "The Fame", "The Fame (..+Monster)" and "The Fame Monster". But anyway, how on Earth the 4,122 for the "BTW" single is not eligible to be added to the total?? It is as official a sales figure as those figures that exceed the certification limits (because it is given by the same authority, Musiikkituottajat). -- Frous (talk) 06:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
The 4,122 is just a sales figure and 878 units under what the Gold single award requires. Meaning, once it surpasses the 5,000 mark, Finland (IFPI) will certified it Gold and it will appear along with these, and only then we can count/insert it. As for The Fame (..+Monster) and The Fame Monster, they are the same thing.--Harout72 (talk) 06:28, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
So...just because the Wikipedia list uses explicitly the term certified (by IFPI or such), we can't add any more figures, because she just haven't earned the gold plate yet for those figures? Stupid policy, that's all I can say, because the body, announcing the figures that exceed the certification level, is exactly the same official body that announces the sales that haven't exceeded them, in that very same source. "Myynti yhteensä" means "The sales altogether"... Anyway, the sales for Gaga in Finland are 79,453 copies, in that case. -- Frous (talk) 13:59, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Besides, if me adding the 79,453 was the second, when was the first? I have added the figures for Gaga once, as far as I remember... -- Frous (talk) 14:08, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The figures for each market needs to be 100,000+; therefore, I removed your insertion of 79,453. This is stated below each section on the list. And I don't understand what you mean by Besides, if me adding the 79,453 was the second, when was the first? I have added the figures for Gaga once, as far as I remember. There is nothing stupid about posting strictly the figures of certified sales when the column clearly states Total Certified Sales. Once those figures for Gaga are included next to the Platinum/Gold awards on this page, we can insert Gaga's certified sales, if the total exceeds the 100,000 mark. Also, it would be best if you started discussing your edits at Talk:List of best-selling music artists before making them on the main page.--Harout72 (talk) 16:33, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited List of number-one albums of 2011 (Finland), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Posthumous (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

List of number-one albums of 2012 (Finland)[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of number-one albums of 2012 (Finland), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://wmda.mobi/en/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Japan.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:47, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Ummmm...what? I copypasted the format of the page from List of number-one albums of 2011 (Finland), in order that all the lists of number-one albums are coherent. -- Frous (talk) 20:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Haavisto[edit]

I cannot remember that I have removed the information. As far as I can remember, it was User:Lihaas, with the edit summary "WP:TRIVIA" (diff). You might ask him, or better discuss the issue on the respective article's talk page. Kind regards --RJFF (talk) 21:15, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:LGBT people from Serbia[edit]

Category:LGBT people from Serbia, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 18:07, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

The Finnish source on Šerifović does not suffice, nothing from her homeland where her works are part of everyday entertainment even come close to confirming she likes women simply because of her appearance. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 18:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey! Ok, thanks for the info. But your message insinuates that I'd have put her in the LGBT category because of her looks. (??) Umm, sorry but that's complete bullshit, I have never talked about her appearance, I have only cited the Finnish newspaper. Please, tell me if I have misunderstood your message above. -- Frous (talk) 15:27, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes sorry, I may have jumped the gun there. You've never mentioned her appearance. But sadly everyone else has and this ultimately leads to speculation. Accept my apologies for being quick off the mark - I don't know why I even added it now! Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 22:29, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Apologies accepted! :) -- Frous (talk) 22:42, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Jonna Pirinen[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Jonna Pirinen has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.  Gongshow Talk 02:51, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Gimmel[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Gimmel has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.  Gongshow Talk 02:55, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Oikeusministerio logo.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Oikeusministerio logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:33, 21 May 2015 (UTC)