User talk:Bueller 007

Thanks!

		The Rosetta Barnstar
		I hereby award you this Rosetta Barnstar for your translation of Fundamental Law of Education (and other articles). Cheers :) Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 00:35, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Barnsensu

		WikiProject Japan Barnsensu Award
		For your excellent work on some of the more obscure Japan-related topics, including nengō. It's great to have people with true passion and expertise not only for the common stuff, but for the more obscure stuff too, to more fully flesh out the 'pedia's coverage of Japanese topics.

LordAmeth 18:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Jaroslav Flegr

Hi there, I've added more references. If you think these do not establish notability, please feel free to replace the tag. All the best Tim Vickers (talk) 17:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Rare to find a notable parasitologist, and he's a fellow protozoologist as well! :) Tim Vickers (talk) 17:16, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Zuiyo Maru Carcass: "New Nessie"?

Hi Bueller 007, I added a discussion topic in the "New Nessie" (WAS: "Zuiyo Maru") article about your name change of 2009/07/04. While I wholeheartedly agree that the article title of "Zuiyo Maru" is illogical, being the name of the ship rather than the animal, I am concerned about the choice of "New Nessie" for a title: perhaps "Zuiyo Maru Carcass" would have been the more appropriate title, given that so many sources I recall reading (in print and on the web) refer to this animal as the Zuiyo Maru Carcass, and I'm personally unaware of anyone calling this thing "New Nessie" (as a proper name) outside of your own retitling. However, while I will assert that I've read many different articles, webpages, and book chapters deaing with the Zuiyo Maru Carcass, I don't have any of those citations handy, nor have I undertaken a survey to compile a scorecard of "New Nessie" versus "Zuiyo Maru Carcass" references. Can you possibly elaborate on your choice of "New Nessie" for an article name? ApostleGreen (talk) 01:51, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Approachtonanking.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Approachtonanking.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pais (talk) 20:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Tang Dynasty

I have engaged a procedure for amending Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty.

• See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment#Request to amend prior case: Tang Dynasty.

I construe the process to require me to notify you; but of course, you are not required to do anything. --Tenmei (talk) 01:11, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Brett Clouser

Hello! I had noticed the "proposed for deletion" banner when I linked from Survivor: Samoa to this page. So, I decided to clean the article up by adding references and removing unnecessary information. Please take a look at the article and tell me if it still does not conform to the guidelines. If so, I will gladly redirect it to Survivor: Samoa. —Untitledmind72 (talk) 01:34, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Re your message: I was just trying to keep the article "alive." If you prefer it gone, should I redirect it to Survivor: Samoa? Or is is possible to have a biography stub? I think a stub would be better, because why isn't he notable enough to have a stub after him? —Untitledmind72 (talk) 02:07, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

• So should I redirect him to Survivor: Samoa? —Untitledmind72 (talk) 12:18, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Russell H.

And now we have Russell Hantz. Seems about equally notable at the moment. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:24, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

The article for Russell H. is practically the same exact format as Natalie's ... it looks like Russell's is a few changes away of the "template" for Natalie's article. Look at the difference! —Untitledmind72 (talk) 00:45, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Russell was at least a memorable character, and I strongly suspect that we'll be seeing him elsewhere in the future, but certainly he's only WP:ONEEVENT at the moment. Bueller 007 (talk) 02:35, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Hunter Ellis

It was not very difficult to begin a bit of cleanup and adding sources. Its a pity that no one had done so, but in regards Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hunter Ellis (2nd nomination), unless you feel that the ample available coverage somehow does not meet WP:GNG, I would ask that you might please consider withdrawing the nomination. Thank you, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:48, 28 December 2009 (UTC)