User talk:Hadseys

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice[edit]

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 23:15, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Polyglot WTG[edit]

Greetings, Andrew! I just saw your Ref Desk query, and while I'm going to let others have a go at it for now, it did lead me to your User page, which I enjoyed reading. I might even be the sort of person you'd like to meet...? For now, I'll highly recommend: if and when you have the time and inclination, translating from foreign language Wikipedia pages into one's native English is an excellent activity: an intellectual challenge and learning process that benefits you and others in the bargain. Besides topics of personal interest, it's a great way to pay tribute to your culture heroes. (I've sometimes been appalled to find that a "newly discovered" author or musician has no page in any language—and once you create even a "stub" article, it takes off!) Also, you might want to add Babel boxes to indicate your languages and level of proficiency in each. Check out my User page for ideas. -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 21:52, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of restrictions imposed on Jews by Nazis[edit]

Hello (again!), A.H.! While we're waiting for more responses to your query, I have a book to recommend that's giving me a lot of insights about what life was like under those restrictions (though in a slightly different time/place: occupied Prague): Life with a Star (English translation of Život s Hvězdou), an autobiographical novel by Jiří Weil. I've been studying this field for nearly a decade, almost full-time, and this book has put a lot of the pieces together. You're welcome to contact me if there's anything particular upon which I might be of help. -- Deborahjay (talk) 21:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Poser.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Poser.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. Nv8200p talk 00:26, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Qs[edit]

Hey, if you don't mind me asking, isn't homosexuality wrong according to Judaism? --Muhammad(talk) 12:41, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    • I class myself as a jew based on my ethnic heritage and my belief in its core principles; I have no intention though of letting ancient texts rule my life as it doesn't change that I'm a good person --Thanks, Hadseys 21:01, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well said. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here @ 00:07, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Interesting that you stay kosher in your diet but not in morals. Forgive my intrusion and thank you for accommodating my nosy question. --Muhammad(talk) 07:14, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whats immoral abot homosexuality. It isn't something that I can control. And if god didn't like it he wouldnt have made me that way --Thanks, Hadseys 09:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May I please ask you to clarify your vote[edit]

here? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:13, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Capture of Abdul Ghani Baradar[edit]

Hello. I've speedy deleted Capture of Abdul Ghani Baradar as a clear copyright violation of the article published by The Times[1]. See Wikipedia:Copyrights for more information. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:00, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Review of closure process 2[edit]

Because you've contributed to FPC either recently or in the past, I'm letting you know about the above poll on the basis of which we may develop proposals to change our procedures and criteria. Regards, Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 09:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Free Will[edit]

If your interested in actually discussing this issue rather than generating lots of silly responses on the ref desk, I'm game. Post to my wall or, better yet, send me an email. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 19:46, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh hi yeh, I just don't really get what advantage we would get by having free will. It doesn't really work out for anybody because we cause chaos, we destroy things, kill each other and animals, and damage the planet. So why would god give us the tools to destroy everything he worked so hard to build --Thanks, Hadseys 20:53, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your question apparently stems from a misguided approach to the reasons why God does certain things, such as create the world. God needs nothing because he is complete and utterly perfect, and no one can know why he does things unless he is explicit in his 'thought process,' so to speak. We attach the term miracle to things that are apparent violations of nature, such as a splitting of a sea or of water turning to blood -- we are thus very impressed when God changes nature. In turn, God's perception of a miracle is when man changes his nature. So there's no sense in creating biological equivalents of robots when, as God as informed man, his desire is for man to better himself. How does man better himself? He engages in behavior modification on a profound level such that it's not just the behavior that changes superficially but a superior, more accomplished change that allows man to truly become a better person. So persevering over anger, jealousy, haughtiness, miserliness, etc. are all miracles in the eyes of God -- man changing his nature. Additionally, there are a number of obligations that man has, and depending on his affiliation with one nation or another, these obligations are distinct. For man to accomplish his goal -- to better himself -- there has to be an option for non-goal oriented activity -- free will does just this. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 03:08, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer rights[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 15:32, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Hello Hadseys! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 944 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Roja Dove - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:47, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Titanic breakup[edit]

I try not to edit that article, but I thought you might consider another change. The ship almost surely did not break into exactly two pieces. That's not how things break unless they're perforated. No? --Ring Cinema (talk) 02:17, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Religion[edit]

You have left a very good question on the Humanities Desk. At the end I've left my comments. Indigenous religions and Revealed Religions differ. There may be article pages here on these topics. Indigenous religions have shown that they could not reach Christian Truths naturally. (My major sudy is this). MacOfJesus (talk) 18:19, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Hadseys/Job interview questions[edit]

User:Hadseys/Job interview questions, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Hadseys/Job interview questions and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Hadseys/Job interview questions during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.  Chzz  ►  04:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 2011[edit]

Your addition to Basket of Wild Flowers (Fabergé egg) has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Dpmuk (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom, you recently added links to the disambiguation pages B.C., Crown and Epiphany (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) 10:51, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help desk question[edit]

In response to your question here, I'm not sure whether this is a question of whether it can technically be done, in which case you would ask here, or a question of whether it is permitted, which means you would likely ask here. I would recommend going to one of those two places and maybe they can direct you to the right place.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:14, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:AndrewMay08.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:AndrewMay08.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. Cloudbound (talk) 21:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Signature Elizabeth II.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Signature Elizabeth II.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. DrKiernan (talk) 16:55, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 28[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Bart the General, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Miss Hoover (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) 14:09, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

History of the World[edit]

Hello, Hadseys! :D

Thanks for your epic contribution to History of the World. I can't imagine the effort you have put in to develop what you wrote. I noticed that you merged your version into the main article space, but I felt that I needed to revert the article back to its previous edit.

First of all, I want to make it clear that I am definitely not criticising the hard work you've done. I quickly scrolled through what you wrote and it appears to be an incredibly comprehensive summary of the history of the world. I'm very glad you wrote it. Reverting the edit does not mean that the content you wrote is anything less than awesome.

The main reason why I reverted your edit was because the article was too long. As a rough guideline, an article should take about 30 to 40 minutes to read at an average pace, so it should be around 6,000 to 10,000 words of prose. This keeps the article at a comfortable length that someone could read it in one sitting. While your contribution is certainly encyclopedic, it should be summarised or split into several articles to allow for better readability.

I am an inclusionist by nature, so I want to make sure that your contribution is properly saved, cultivated, and added to the Wikipedia mainspace. That's where it belongs. :D

But before your hard work can be inserted into the History of the world, we should collaborate with other editors to make sure that we can fit it in to the mainspace properly.

I noticed that you have a copy of the contribution in your userspace, and I have made a copy too (with attribution, of course).

I hope you don't take my revert personally. I want to be clear that your hard work is certainly appreciated and I will give you my full support getting it into the article.

Kind regards, Matt (talk) 01:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any references for your article? It would be a shame if it couldn't be included into the mainspace article because it wasn't verifiable. Matt (talk) 02:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems[edit]

I see you've deleted my warning. I assume you've read it. I really would like to know if you understand the problem and are clear that you won't add such material in the future, and if you are prepared to help remove any copyvio from article space that you may have added. I'd also like to know what the various Wikipedia like subpages you've created are about, eg. User:Hadseys/Fixing mistakes. Dougweller (talk) 11:47, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well it infringed copyright when you deleted it, and it was incomplete. The book was a template I was working from that I would adjust piece by piece in due course. I was going to rewrite it. And they're just my notes --Thanks, Hadseys (talk) 11:50, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: User:Hadseys/Summary of the Bible[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as User:Hadseys/Summary of the Bible, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from The Illustrated Bible Story by Story, possibly other sources, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at User talk:Hadseys/Summary of the Bible saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been cautioned before that you cannot copy content from other sources into Wikipedia unless it is compatibly licensed, public domain or briefly excerpted and clearly marked as quotations. If you want to make notes from your sources, you must do them somewhere else. Even then, you have to be sure that what you present in the article is entirely your own. In addition to blanking this page, which violates our copyright policies, I have deleted User:Hadseys/Introduction to cosmology as copying from Stephen Hawking and will be investigated your other subpages to see if they need to be removed or rewritten as well. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
User:Hadseys/List of English Monarchs (1066-2012) is now also blanked pending a rewrite or verification of permission. User:Hadseys/Guide to Clinical Medicine has been deleted. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:08, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please read the template on the page. You may not restore this content to publication prior to resolution of this issue. We cannot publish copyright infringements anywhere on Wikipedia. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: Coronation of George IV[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Coronation of George IV, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://www.georgianindex.net/coronation/Coronation-GeorgeIV.html, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Coronation of George IV saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've double-checked to make sure that they did not copy from you, and it seems plain that they did not, given that you created the article in 2010 and the website archives verify they had this content at least by 2008 and possibly sooner; I didn't check the older archives. Duplication detector shows that hundreds of words have been copied from this site. In order to retain this article, it will need to be rewritten from scratch, in your own language. One of the bigger mistakes people make in rewriting these is to follow the original too closely, which may create a derivative work. If you choose to rewrite this, you should start over and be careful to avoid too closely paraphrasing your source. Any copied content must be plainly marked as a quotation and it must be used for good reason, such as those set out in the guideline portion of non-free content policy. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 2012[edit]

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without verifying permission. You have been previously warned that this is against policy, but have persisted. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:37, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would not have blocked you simply for again removing the template (although I would have protected the page to prevent your doing so again), but when you actually add in more content that is copied from that book, I don't see that we have any choice. This is a temporary block. I'm hoping that you will take note that you can't keep doing this. If you have questions about our copyright policies, I'm happy to discuss them with you. If you have questions about how to resolve the copyright issues that have been brought up, I'm happy to discuss those with you. But it's imperative that you stop placing content here out of process that is taken from copyrighted sources. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • What have I allegedly copyrighted. Ive just summarised the first few chapters of the first few books of the bible. Yeh i've used a book as a source but it isnt written exactly the same ... of course there are similarities we're using the same source material
It doesn't have to be written exactly the same to constitute a copyright infringement. If you follow the original too closely, you create a derivative work. Taking at random a paragraph from the content you added after the page was blanked, here's what your source says, at page 51:

Abram asked God for a sign of all that he had said: so God told him to get a cow, goat, and a ram, each three years old, and two birds - a dove and a pigeon. Following a covenant ritual that would have been familiar to him (see Covenants panel, left), Abram cut the larger animals in half, laying the halves opposite each other. At sunset, he fell into a deep sleep, and God spoke to him again, reassuring him that his descendants would possess the land of Canaan, though not for some time. To confirm what he had said, God made a binding contract, or covenant, with Abram. Appearing as a smoking firepot and blazing torch, God passed between the separated pieces of the animals. He did not require Abram to also pass between the animals, however, underlining there was nothing Abram could bring to the promise and the commitment to give Abram's descendants of the land.

Here's what you wrote:

Abram asked God for a sign of all that he had said; so God told him to get a cow, goat, and a ran, each three years old, and two birds - a dove and a pigeon. Following a covenant ritual, Abram cut the larger animals in half, laying the halves opposite each other. At sunset, he fell into a deep sleep, and God spoke to him again, reassuring him that his descendants would possess the land of Canaan, thought not for a while. To confirm what he had said, God created a binding contract, a covenant, with Abram. Appearing as a smoking firepot and blazing torch, God passed between the separated pieces of the animals. He did not require Abram to pass between the animals, however, indicating there was nothing Abram could bring to the promise.

I have bolded the sections that seem to be copied exactly (although you may have omitted a few words and you misspelled "ram"). You've changed very little in this paragraph. This doesn't come close to representing an adequate paraphrase in terms of what you may place on Wikipedia. Every time you hit "save page", in article space or user space, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use. You cannot do this when you are copying somebody else's work, unless that work is compatible with our own license. Everything you add to our sites must be written completely in your own words, unless it is taken from a compatibly licensed source or unless it is a brief and clearly marked quotation. See Wikipedia:Copy-paste for more.
You'll need to understand our policies and comply with them if you wish to continue contributing to Wikipedia. While we welcome all contributors, these policies are important to our site. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Additional accounts[edit]

It's been pointed out to me that immediately after the page was blanked the second time, a brand new account copied it over. It seems pretty likely that this account was created by you. You may not be aware that we have policies against multiple accounts for most uses; see Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. Given the extreme likeliness that this account is a second account of your own, it has been blocked. I have not imposed any sanctions on the underlying IP. I presume that you were unaware that this was a problem, but I needed to be sure that you were alerted to the issue to prevent any future misunderstandings. The copyright issue cannot easily be overcome by switching accounts, which may create additional complications moving forward. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:23, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright block[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without verifying permission. You have been previously warned that this is against policy, but have persisted.

Please take this opportunity to be sure you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content. If you wish to resume editing, it may be necessary for you to demonstrate your understanding of these policies and reassure the community of your willingness to comply. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:32, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Another administrator pointed out to me that you are still pasting content onto Wikipedia with minimal or no alterations. For one example from one of the now-deleted pages, your source says:

Recorded history is a tiny point on a scale of knowledge that reaches back through the millennia to the first appearance on earth of the species, Man. Anthropologists, prehistorians and archaeologists have extended our vista of the past by tens and hundreds of thousands of years. We cannot understand human history without taking account of their findings. The transformation of Man (or, more accurately, of certain groups of men in certain areas) from a hunter and fisher to an agriculturist, and from a migratory to a sedentary life, is the most decisive revolution in the whole of human history. The climatic and ecological changes which made it possible have left their mark on the human record down to the present day.

Your page said:

Recorded history is only the tip of an iceberg reaching back to the first appearance on earth of the human species. Anthropologists, prehistorians and archaeologists have extended our vista of the past by hundreds of thousands of years: we cannot understand human history without taking account of their findings. The transformation of humankind (or, more accurately, of certain groups of humans in certain areas) from hunters and fishers to agriculturalists, and from a migratory to a sedentary life, constitutes the most decisive revolution in the whole of human history. The climatic and ecological changes which made it possible have left their mark on the historical record down to the present day.

Since it seems that you either cannot or will not follow our copyright policies, I have indefinitely suspended your account. If you wish your account to be reactivated, you will more than likely need to demonstrate an understanding of the problem and a willingness to correct it.
Please remember that creating other accounts during your block is in itself a violation of policy. Any content added to any article by "sock puppets" may be deleted on discovery. If you wish to contribute to Wikipedia, you should negotiate the restoration of editing rights to this account. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:32, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Funny isnt it how you never knew about these pages, after all they werent on the encyclopedia mainspace, for years and now all of a sudden its an issue? Should be consistent --Thanks, Hadseys (talk) 22:36, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • True but your not consistent in your detection are you. Mean it was fine their for 2 years nobody said anything but now it needs to be destroyed and somebody whose been here for yours indefinitely blocked? Think you gone a bit overboard tbh --Thanks, Hadseys (talk) 13:26, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, it needs to be deleted when it is discovered. This is policy. You would not have been blocked had you not persisted; your block is not for older content, but for continuing after the policies have been explained. The example above was placed on July 31st. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Signature Elizabeth II.jpg missing description details[edit]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 08:26, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Hadseys/sandbox[edit]

User:Hadseys/sandbox, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Hadseys/sandbox and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Hadseys/sandbox during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 18:58, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:School leavers portrait.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:School leavers portrait.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 00:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sparkles1.JPG listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sparkles1.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 00:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hadseys&oldid=1138272674"