Fair use rationale for Image:123dads.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:123dads.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

=IDPs in the United States[edit]

The ranking list you put in for IDPs in the United States needs to be cited. I'll give you about a week to cite it and then I'm going to delete it. Sean0987 (talk) 15:42, 23 April 2008 (UTC)Sean0987[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Richseal.jpg)[edit]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This Guy[edit]

merited alot of cooling off time from what I have seen in articles where our paths crossed.

Image:Wiccanfuneral.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Wiccanfuneral.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media 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. Damiens.rf 18:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:24hrsclposter.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:24hrsclposter.jpg. 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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:24hrsclposter.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:24hrsclposter.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Analpickup.jpg)[edit]

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:06, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:Berkeleyplaneview2.jpg[edit]

A tag has been placed on Image:Berkeleyplaneview2.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Berkeleyplaneview2.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Soundvisions1 (talk) 07:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfD nomination of Horny fucker[edit]

NowCommons: File:BurnsFamily400h.jpg[edit]

File:BurnsFamily400h.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:BurnsFamily400h (1).jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:BurnsFamily400h (1).jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 08:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Millerknoxmap.gif listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Millerknoxmap.gif, 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. MBisanz ^talk 23:10, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Shawn Jamieson[edit]

I have nominated Shawn Jamieson, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shawn Jamieson. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 05:43, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of King & King[edit]

I have nominated King & King, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King & King. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. — The Man in Question (in question) 05:47, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Hello Qrc2006! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is 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 insure 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 974 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Karen Atala - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:JimRogerspeeplaw.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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Closedmouth (talk) 11:14, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nine inch cock listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Nine inch cock. Since you had some involvement with the Nine inch cock redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). SnottyWong ^{spill the beans} 16:43, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Who's in a Family?[edit]

The article Who's in a Family? has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable book fails WP:BK. Notability requires more than one review.

While all 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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Lionel (talk) 23:40, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Gaylerich.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) 13:43, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Wildcatcynmap.gif[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wildcatcynmap.gif. 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) 05:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Spanish language in Bolivia for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spanish language in Bolivia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spanish language in Bolivia until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ryan Vesey (talk) 15:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:EastshoreSPmap.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:EastshoreSPmap.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. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:06, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of John Márquez[edit]

Hello, Qrc2006, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you worked on, John Márquez, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

edit the page
remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
save the page

It helps to explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the Help Desk. Thanks again for contributing! Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 05:02, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jim Rogers (politician) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jim Rogers (politician) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Rogers (politician) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 05:04, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Irma Anderson[edit]

Hello, Qrc2006, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that some editors are discussing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irma Anderson whether the article Irma Anderson should be in Wikipedia. I encourage you to comment there if you think the article should be kept in the encyclopedia.

The deletion discussion doesn't mean you did something wrong. In fact, other editors may have useful suggestions on how you can continue editing and improving Irma Anderson, which I encourage you to do. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Help Desk.

Thanks again for your contributions! Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 15:59, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Rosemary Corbin[edit]

Hello, Qrc2006, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that some editors are discussing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosemary Corbin whether the article Rosemary Corbin should be in Wikipedia. I encourage you to comment there if you think the article should be kept in the encyclopedia.

The deletion discussion doesn't mean you did something wrong. In fact, other editors may have useful suggestions on how you can continue editing and improving Rosemary Corbin, which I encourage you to do. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Help Desk.

Thanks again for your contributions! Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 16:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John Márquez for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Márquez is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Márquez until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 16:07, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nathanial Bates for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nathanial Bates is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathanial Bates until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 16:07, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Richard Griffin (Councilmember)[edit]

Hello, Qrc2006, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that some editors are discussing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Griffin (Councilmember) whether the article Richard Griffin (Councilmember) should be in Wikipedia. I encourage you to comment there if you think the article should be kept in the encyclopedia.

The deletion discussion doesn't mean you did something wrong. In fact, other editors may have useful suggestions on how you can continue editing and improving Richard Griffin (Councilmember), which I encourage you to do. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Help Desk.

Thanks again for your contributions! Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 16:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mindell Penn for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mindell Penn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mindell Penn until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 16:15, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of María Viramontes for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article María Viramontes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/María Viramontes until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 16:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

st. david[edit]

St. David School (Richmond, California) an article that you have participated in editing has been nominated for deletion a second time, the first time in 2006 resulted in no consensus and, it can be reviewed here. The current discussion on the removal of the article is located here should you wish leave your comment.LuciferWildCat (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

st. david[edit]

St. David School (Richmond, California) an article that you have participated in editing has been nominated for deletion a second time, the first time in 2006 resulted in no consensus and, it can be reviewed here. The current discussion on the removal of the article is located here should you wish leave your comment.LuciferWildCat (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

st. david[edit]

St. David School (Richmond, California) an article that you have participated in editing has been nominated for deletion a second time, the first time in 2006 resulted in no consensus and, it can be reviewed here. The current discussion on the removal of the article is located here should you wish leave your comment.LuciferWildCat (talk) 05:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Metro Walk[edit]

Hi, you have edited Metro Walk and this article is currently under a contentious debate on a possible merger or deletion, your opinion on the matter and content might be useful in resolving the issues and reaching consensus, perhaps you would then like to do so at your convenience. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luciferwildcat (talk • contribs) 00:04, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Original Kings of Comedy franchise[edit]

Category:Original Kings of Comedy franchise, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. 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. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:50, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John Márquez for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Márquez is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Márquez (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 16:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cleopatra[edit]

Regarding File:Cleovictoria.jpg which was deleted at Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions/Archive/Archive_4#Cleovictoria.JPG could you perhaps upload it to the Wikimedia Commons? I'm assuming it is nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Image:Cleovictoria.JPG featured on nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Cleopatra-VII-of-Egypt ? Ranze (talk) 16:05, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT... listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect LGBT.... Since you had some involvement with the LGBT... redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Cloudyjbg27512 (talk) 11:46, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation[edit]

Your upload of File:Argmapstgoesteroquechua.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another one of your uploads, File:ArgmapKaiwálang.JPG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:13, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ricky Clousing for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ricky Clousing is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ricky Clousing until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Gbawden (talk) 17:49, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Odysea[edit]

The article Odysea has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability. Only ref was companies website and no accessible. Shop appears to have closed.

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. ~KvnG 03:43, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of What Are Parents[edit]

The article What Are Parents has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unotable book that has been marked for notability for years

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. Wgolf (talk) 20:30, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ricky Clousing for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ricky Clousing is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ricky Clousing (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:01, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bear Transit[edit]

The article Bear Transit has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Local university bus service that fails WP:ORG

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. Regards, James(^talk/_contribs) 16:52, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bear Transit for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bear Transit is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bear Transit until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Regards, James(^talk/_contribs) 10:31, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The rich listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The rich. Since you had some involvement with the The rich redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Darrell Anderson for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Darrell Anderson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darrell Anderson until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bonewah (talk) 16:51, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ricky Clousing for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ricky Clousing is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ricky Clousing (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:14, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ecologist Party of Mali[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Ecologist Party of Mali requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Me-123567-Me (talk) 20:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Languages of South America[edit]

Template:Languages of South America has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 14:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Argmapstgoesteroquechua.JPG[edit]

The file File:Argmapstgoesteroquechua.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned map.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 17:16, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ptisabelmap.gif listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ptisabelmap.gif, 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. —innotata 22:37, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Richard Griffin (councilmember) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Richard Griffin (councilmember) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Griffin (councilmember) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 16:27, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ludmyrna Lopez for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ludmyrna Lopez is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ludmyrna Lopez (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 16:40, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Emerysky.jpg[edit]

The file File:Emerysky.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Poor quality and orphaned image with no foreseeable encyclopedic use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pkbwcgs (talk) 20:45, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Blackiegwiazdon.jpg[edit]

The file File:Blackiegwiazdon.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That family that got lost in their car listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect That family that got lost in their car. Since you had some involvement with the That family that got lost in their car redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:37, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Richmond City Council (Richmond, California)[edit]

Template:Richmond City Council (Richmond, California) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ミラ P 03:52, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jim Rogers (California politician) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jim Rogers (California politician) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Rogers (California politician) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:59, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Up Your Alley Fair[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Up Your Alley Fair requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. SunCrow (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Richmond City Council (Richmond, California) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Richmond City Council (Richmond, California) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richmond City Council (Richmond, California) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. John from Idegon (talk) 21:35, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Small-demotape.gif[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Small-demotape.gif. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:01, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Small-self-titled-ep.gif[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Small-self-titled-ep.gif. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:02, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mark Wilkerson (conscientious objector)[edit]

The article Mark Wilkerson (conscientious objector) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no significant coverage

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Dumelow (talk) 09:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]