User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:38, 10 March 2008

Please may I assure you that I do not wish to have an article about me on Wikipedia. I wrote that piece for the Times because I needed the cash -- simple as that. I wouldn't believe all you read in the papers! Contact my shop in the morning (you'll find it via Google), speak to my assistant Jane, leave a number and I will phone you back to confirm that it is my wish to be removed from Wikipedia. Thank you. Muirhead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.150.190 (talk) 21:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please leave a new message.

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try Wikipedia:How to edit a page.
To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes).
You can experiment in the test area.
You can get help at the Help Desk
Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Civility, Wikipedia:Wikiquette, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
If you made IP edits before creating a user account, you can attribute your IP edits to your account at Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit.

Location

I'm in the DC area (in fact, I just signed up for the DC meetup on December 9th). -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, haven't eaten at Marrakesh. My wife and I have only been in the DC area for about a year and a half; she works downtown (actually, not to far from that restaurant) but we live in Silver Spring, so we don't eat in the city that often. Can't say that we're into Moroccan food, possibly because of the belly dancers, possibly because the last time we ate at such a restaurant, years ago (in Northern California) a waiter spilled several glasses of water on my wife's plate of food. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:37, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Greatest ever

Template:Greatest ever has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Bob talk 19:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:08lederberg_lg.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:08lederberg_lg.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. -- RG² 13:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Peggycourt.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Peggycourt.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. -- RG² 13:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Dasburg

On 4 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Andrew Dasburg, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on the DYK! The nomination was my idea, but the credit for the creation of the article belongs to you. Alansohn 20:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice.Kevin Borland, Esq. 10:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_November_6#Cold_feet

Step 3 of a DRV says "Inform the administrator who deleted the page by adding the following on their user talk page: {{subst:DRVNote|PAGE_NAME}}". Please bother to do so in future. Neil ☎ 16:15, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Access date

I've tried several different variations of the date in this citation and they all come up as either a redlink or as it did here [1]. Do you have any other ideas of how to fix it? Wildhartlivie 16:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page names

I appreciate the work your doing cleaning up and improving biographies. However I'm a bit mystified by some renamings. You moved "Glenda Green" to "Glenda Allen Green" despite every source calling her just "Glenda Green". You moved "Edward Weston" to "Edward Henry Weston", again despite that being a very rare usage. I think that WP:NC and WP:NCP call on us to use the most common name. When there's a conflict it's best to append a qualifier (for example "Edward Weston (photographer)" rather than adding in unsed middle names. Am I wrong in believing that's standard practice? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I move the article name already for you, since the above user is right about the naming convention. Hope you don't mind. Chris! _ct 02:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References

Just a friendly note. Your reference for The Twomps, Oakland, California in East Oakland, Oakland, California is not a good one, since it requires people to log in. So people without an account might not be able to look at it. Chris! _ct 02:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

image query

Hi, I am wanting to move Image:Walsh 033.jpg to commons so that it can be used on s:Author:Charles Francis Walsh. However, I dont see any evidence that it has been licensed under CC on the mentioned source http://earlyaviators.com . Could you clarify please.. John Vandenberg 10:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will ask Ernie, the copyright holder to forward a letter to me again. Sadly I lost my hotmail archive, when Microsoft deleted my account for not logging in often enough. I lost 10 years of emails.

Genealogy wiki

Check your watchlist on the genealogy wiki. Now that I've played around with Wikipedia, I finally understand the powerfulness of the Wiki concept. Made some contributions. Will expand.Kevin Borland, Esq. 10:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An application of BIO

I got involved in Mitch Clem at AfD. Can you look at the references and let me know whether you think I'm right on his notability. He is not an important topic, but this illustrates an important application of the BIO and Notability rules. I think that the Minnesota Public Radio spot is just about enough, then the mention in PC World, while not in-depth clearly is saying this person is noticed. The other comixtalk source is marginal, but I think that it adds to credibilty. It appeares that Comixtalk has a blog section, but where he is covered is more akin to an online magazine in a scheduled and dated issue. Cheers! --Kevin Murray 15:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clem

Please hold off on restoring the note until we can talk a bit. At minimum these are creating confusion in the AfD. --Kevin Murray 17:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have mixed feelings on referencing to a subject's site. In this case, I think that it is over done. Since we do not allow autobiography, there is a fine line when we reference to autobiographies. I don't want to prohibit referencing to the sites of subjects, but how do we set objective standards? --Kevin Murray 17:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC) (1956 - ?)[reply]

I'm not a big advocate for prohibition of autobio ofr referece, just see limits as appropriate. If you read throught the AfD on CLem though there is opposition. I'll read through WP:AUTO. WP:N requires independence for establishing notability, but that does no specifically effect the references.

A proble that I have seen at AfD is that through either cunning or ignorance, proponents for deletion attack the weak references to cloud the strength of the good references. In defending article against AfD in the past, I've found that removing the weak references gives an article a better chance of surviving the AfD as the focus moves from red herrings to logic. WP is not a perfect world, but off the golf course there is no perfect world, and on the course there are few perfect strokes. --Kevin Murray 17:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Richard, please take a look at the section which I added to the bottom of the AfD at Mitch Clem. I'm not seeing any guideline to refute your position. However, I do think that we can over footnote to obscure the forrest with trees. --Kevin Murray 18:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I will revert my removal of the notes but put them into a separate "Notes" section which segrates these from references. --Kevin Murray 18:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Remembrance...

--nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 17:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Comixtalk

Comixtalk, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Comixtalk satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comixtalk and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Comixtalk during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Chris! _ct 00:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you don't take this personal. But I think it has no content. Sorry. Chris! _ct 00:45, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:RobertBuck book.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:RobertBuck book.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. BetacommandBot 02:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Albertfish-full.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Albertfish-full.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).

Thanks for saving the article!

Hello, Mr. Norton, and thanks for attempting to save my article! For that, I give you this barnstar:

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For tirelessly improving the article and saving it from deletion, I owe you one! So, here it is, the Tireless Contributor Barnstar! --Go od sh op ed 02:28, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gerontology Research Group

I've been following that afd also, it all seems very heated. Since it was only nominated 3 days ago, maybe, just maybe a consensus can still be reached, here's hoping anyways. -- RMHED (talk) 20:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

== Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronn Torossian==

Quote from bottom of AFD - "Comment I agree with Agavtouch that one needs only to match just a few of the users who voted Keep here with the client list of 5W Public Relations which is listed on Wikipedia as adverts. It is a sad sham. Also transparent spin tactics used by the employees of 5W Public Relations to attempt to divert attention and attack those who have voted delete from the many gross and documented violations of SPAM and NPOV committed by Torossian and his paid employees. Lastly, please note how Torossian & Co. continue to delete any mention on this article of the New York Post news story illustrating malice and bad faith created by Torossian against the NYC PR industry. Not very objective.[2] Heathspic (talk) 17:12, 21 November 2007 (UTC)"

Perhaps you can add User:Alansohn's Checkuser piece to the delete page, I am not certain User:Heathspic and User:Agavtouch are aware of it.

I come to you realizing here too that maybe I should no longer be involved, but this has become more of a circus and an exhibit into Wiki tolerance. I invite you to scrutinize any of my edits. While placing an article about something I have involvement with may be seen by some as a blatant Wiki violation, I also know that many articles are started by people who have deep knowledge, hobby interest, or first hand experience with a topic, even if there is no financial interest, it is a closeness that drives the piece. If done right and notability is there, there is nothing wrong with it as I see it. Being open about it helps too. I know that these three parties to the deletion are a person with little Wiki concern and a huge axe to grind. I have edited and added articles for a year and a half on many topics, most of which I am familiar with and have researched. Thank you. Juda S. Engelmayer (talk) 18:14, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copy edit

I copy edited Walter O'Malley and renominated it. I think you could improve your GAC success with a few minor pointers. You do excellent research. I’ll throw out 2 grammatical pointers and 2 WP:MOS pointers:

<ref></ref> tags should follow a punctuation with no space between and follow each other with no space between
Alphabetize your categories

Don’t split your noun verb constructions. I.E., Then, he went is preferred to He then went.
Another big improvement might be found at Conjunction junction. Think about your independent and dependent phrases. Independent phrases are joined either by a semicolon or a comma and a conjunction. However, if they are not both independent just a conjunction is necessary. I.e, either “He did this and that.” or “He did this, and he did that.”

I would be glad to copy edit another of your articles that has not yet made GA. Who is the most important aviator on your list or the article you think could benefit most from a copy edit?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 22:21, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will look at Raoul Wallenberg. My example before was not that good. Actually, a better example is either “He did this first and did that afterwards.” or “He did this first, and he did that afterwards.” This is a better example because the previous example was a list of two things versus two independent phrases. This is an independent and dependent phrase versus two independents. Basically, see if a phrase has both a noun and a verb. If so, it is independent and needs to be conjoined accordingly with other independent phrases. If it is verb lacking a subject it relies on a subject from another phrase and is thus dependent. The lower of the two edits here is a good example. The one at the top sounds incorrect because whiile is an awkward conjunction. I may even be wrong, but I am going with the conjunction rule as I understand it. Anyways, my advice to you would be to pay attention to where your independent phrases are when you write and you will probably seem like a better writer. Anyways, I am off to look at Wallenberg.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 16:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That page is pretty well conjoined. I am going to have to go back and look at my GMAT prep book to remember some more complicated referent rules to do a better copy edit on that page, but will do so in the next few weeks. I am going to brush up on my copyediting and this page is a great challenge. I will do what I can with the rules I remember right now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 16:18, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Back to O'Malley. What kind of engineer was he. Did he operate a subway train or was he engaged in engineering?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 16:41, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Sean Kinney; Governor of North Dakota; NBAA Meritorious Service to Aviation Award; John-Paul Clarkin; Robert R. Reid; Curtis T. McMullen; Blake Richardson; Brian Jones (aeronaut); Richard Parker (economist); List of people pardoned by Bill Clinton; Paul Clarkin; Shigefumi Mori; Governor of Florida; Charles Wesley Turnbull; Governor of New Hampshire; Norman St John-Stevas, Baron St John of Fawsley; Thompson trophy; Heisuke Hironaka; Jake Voskuhl

Cleanup: Stephanus Van Cortlandt; List of players from Canada in Major League Baseball; Republican Governors Association
Merge: Insert (SQL); Zacarias Moussaoui; Penguin poetry anthologies
Add Sources: Felix Perez Camacho; Rod Blagojevich; William Z. Foster
Wikify: Behavior; Paul Winchell; Floyd Tillman
Expand: Children of the Prime Ministers of Canada; Hollywood blacklist; Fokker F.VII

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ForteTuba (talk) 15:23, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Raoul Wallenberg

In all I have spent about 2 hours with Raoul Wallenberg. I think that it is destined for WP:GAR. It requires editorial skills I do not excel at to retain its WP:GA. It needs someone to chop out things or track down proper refs for large chunks of unsourced text. It needs to have several {{fact}} tags added. I had volunteered for an article that is grammatical duress. I am not good at tracking down other people's sources. Therefore, I mostly work on articles from redlink or stub class. I can spend more time with the article, but my efforts will not save it. If you have anything that is more in need of grammatical repair, I could probably help in a way that would more likely lead to a promotion. However, I am willing to stick with this article.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 22:17, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to List of vaporware

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to List of vaporware. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you. -- intgr [talk] 09:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coot dab page

You restored "Coot, a derogatory term for an elderly man" at Coot (disambiguation), but you may have missed my previous removal rationale. "Elderly man" is covered by the link to wiktionary. Disambiguation pages disambiguate between articles (MOS:DAB), but there is no elderly man article. Furthermore, Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. I'll undo your edit again. Just to keep you informed. :-) – sgeureka ^t•c 10:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional universe AFDs

Hi.

While my personal views upon the subject differ from yours, I think you might find Wikicharts useful if you haven't used it before - and you're more or less right, 29 (30 if you count Beowulf) of the top 100 right now (taking out the Main Page) most viewed articles are contemparary fiction (although very few episodes that actually get into the top 200, and those that do are normally Doctor Who episodes) Will ^(talk) 16:32, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Handbra

An article on which you previously commented has been proposed for deletion again, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Handbra (second nomination). You may wish to comment.DGG (talk) 03:59, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Melt the clouds of sin and sadness, drive the dark of doubt away!

Joy

Marlith ^T/C has given you a kitten! Kittens promote Wikilove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Share the WikiLove and civility with everyone and keep up the excellent editing! Send kittens to others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Marlith ^T/C 18:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Raoul Wallenberg

Hi, this article was a wreck. I didn't have much time, but I tried to make some fairly radical changes to bring it back to a decent state, after a series of edits by Attila Lajos (who wrote his PhD thesis on Wallenberg [2]) that gave the article a rather non-neutral point of view. I hope that I can draw some attention to it so that you or someone else can give it the time it deserves. –Joke 21:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the quick response. It is not only that his English isn't good, but that he is in fact making the argument, in the article, that Wallenberg's importance in the Hungarian Holocaust rescue is vastly overstated. This diverges radically from most of the published information I am able to find about Wallenberg on the web. Disregarding whether his edits count as original research, and leaving aside the fact that I don't have any idea what the truth of the matter is, but if Lajos's points are to be included in the article at all, they must be presented in contrast to the conventional viewpoint, rather than replace it in toto. –Joke 21:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BK Articles

Thank you taking the time to properly cite those articles. I originally cleaned them up on my way through the Burger King articles and only cited them as warranted, in other words when someone bitched. I have been going through the main articles because they need so much work.

Jeremy (Jerem43 08:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Well spoken defense of these articles and I'll reiterate Jeremy's thanks for helping out with the articles. Are you interested in editing food and drink articles in general, or is this something that you just noticed passing through the AFD list?--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 22:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting because before I went back to school to get my BBA in hospitality management, I almost decided to go a different direction and go for the food science program at Rutgers. I finally came to my senses and realized I love the hospitality, business and cuisine sides of the food industry too much. I've actually taken classes at both CIA campuses, but mostly I visit the Hyde Park campus as it is closer to home. I did live in California at one point though, and at that time Napa Valley was closer to home. One of the reasons I asked you about your interest as well, was that I was going to invite you to come help us over at WikiProject Food and Drink as ever more so now, you seem to have quite a bit of knowledge that could help us out quite a bit. Well I need to get back to term papers, so hopefully we will talk more soon.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 21:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:HalRoach 001a.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:HalRoach 001a.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 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. Ytfin (talk) 02:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Poon-Lim.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Poon-Lim.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:GAR#Raoul_Wallenberg

I thought I would give you a heads up on WP:GAR#Raoul_Wallenberg.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userfying articles on AFD

Hi Richard. I noticed you copy and pasted Futurama articles that were on their way to being deleted into various user spaces. You must not copy and paste articles into userspace. Doing so loses the page history, and thus the authors of the content. The page or any text from it cannot be used again, as it is in violation of GFDL. If you wish pages to be userfied, then request it from the deleting admin, or from DRV, following deletion. At that point they can be restored, moved (not copy & pasted) to userspace, and the redirects removed. This retains the history, thus ensuring the content can be merged into appropriate articles. Neil ☎ 10:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Richard, there is no rule against userfying articles - what you were doing was not userfying, as you had not included the history of the article. See WP:USERFY - cut and pasting the text of an article violates GFDL as the article history is lost, this is why userfying usually means "move", not "cut and paste". If you really feel you have to cut and paste (not advisable), then as per WP:USERFY#Cut_and_paste_userification, you need to also cut and paste the history. You also failed to remove fair use screenshots from the userspace copies you made, breaking WP:FU. The GFDL states all information is freely available but attribution must be retained. By breaking the chain of attribution (losing the article history), you are breaching GFDL. It's not a big deal, just bear it in mind in future. Neil ☎ 15:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it violates GFDL, every use outside of Wikipedia violates GFDL, since they do not include a comprehensive edit history. Can you point to the part of the GFDL license that requires the edit history to be preserved. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 15:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure on the details of the GFDL, but you could export the article (before deletion) then upload that file somewhere to serve the part of attribution, even if the original file is deleted on Wikipedia. However, it might just be easier to ask that someone move the page itself so that you can work on it, which many admins are willing to do. -- Ned Scott 23:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hi, I re-added your comment. I reverted your edit because you restored comments Angela had removed. Cheers,Je t Lover (Report a mistake) 23:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Thanks, and happy editing! Cheers,Je t Lover (Report a mistake) 23:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading an image on Wikipedia

Dear Richard, If I upload an image on Wikipedia for an established article, I notice that I must cite a rationale for it--or else it gets deleted within 7 days. What kind of rationale is OK in your view for one of those fairly obscure articles for which there are few on-line photos? For instance, you downloaded an excellent photo of Pharaoh Setnakht here: [3]. Would your rationale for uploading the image be OK today. It feels as if Wikipedia has tightened its restrictions on the use of images somewhat. Just asking for some advice. Thank You, Leoboudv (talk) 20:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Richard, Thanks for the example of WP Fair Use. It is an excellent rationale. And thank you for downloading the photo of pharaoh Setnakht. Its almost impossible to get an image of this shortlived pharaoh who ruled Egypt for only 4 years on the web. And yet, he founded the 20th dynasty in Egypt and was an important person in Ancient Egyptian history--which is one of my hobbies. Fabian from Canada Leoboudv (talk) 22:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Is Wikipedia really cracking down hard on new photos--or just on those photos with no given rationale? I notice that someone named Betacommand comes down hard on people who list photos on Wikipedia. In my view, if there is an established article on a certain subject or personality, a photo should be OK provided it is a single photo only. Fabian Leoboudv (talk) 01:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BrownHairedGirl and Bad Faith Nominations of Supercentenarians

I don't want to seem rude but, but these look like Bad Faith nominations. A basic Google search found many references. It appears that you were angry and retaliated by nominating all the articles for deletion without performing the minimal due diligence to see which ones actually could be referenced. For example see: Flossie Page, Sarah_Knauss and Mary Electa Bidwell, all have ample references. I don't know how you couldn't find them, unless revenge was your motivation. Cheers. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 22:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't want to appear rude, then learn a little bit of manners and don't rush to alleging bad faith and using boldface type to make unfounded accusations of selective research just because you found some reproductions of articles which, if verified, could support a claim to notability (as yoiu will see from my comments, you reference lists are less impressive than they appear: two of your refs for Flossie Page include no links, which is very odd if you found then on google as you claim, and your refs for Sarah Knauss are mostly either duplicates of the same wire stories or copyvio reproductions).

I nominated dozens of articles for which I had not found references, and most of them remain unreferenced. Well done finding a few snippets, but you really ought to learn the difference between someone missing a few links and an absence of checking. As I have stated umpteen times, my preference with most of the many articles on non-notable oldies would have been to merge them, and it was only when the mergers were reverted while notability was still not established that I brought them to AfD to allow for a consensus decision on their fate in those cases where I did not find references (I did find refs for example for Virginia Muise, and added them to the article). As you will see if you look at the many other nominations, most of them have not so far been improve to meet notability thresholds.

Now, unless you can learn some manners and stop making personal attacks, stay off my talk page. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read this which gives the appearance that you are acting out of anger and frustration, and were nominating multiple articles:

"I have objection at all to unmerger if notability has been established per WP:BIO, but if you persist in simply reverting the merger without improving the articles to meet WP:BIO, then I will simply save myself the time and nominate them at AfD. ... Your call. ... It's a pity that you prefer to unmerge the articles rather than improve them, but both are now AFDed." I also chastised Katia for her haste and retaliatory nominations. errors are made when decisions are made in haste and in anger. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 06:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Norton, which bit of "stay off my talk page" is that you are unable to comprehend? Let me spell it out more simply: "do not post on my talk page again".
  As I have explained umpteen times, I nominated for AfD when merger was rejected, and (as you ought to know) at AfD the community can decide whether to merge, keep or delete. My preference in all cases was for the articles to be improved if possible, which is precisely why I was mergeing then rather than going straight to AfD, but if that option is rejected I prefer deletion to keeping under-referenced permastubs. You may disagree on that choice, but it's an unfounded personal attack to repeatedly characterise that as revenge. When the editors with expertise in the field insist that an article with a directory entry is so notable that it should not be merged, then AfD is the only way to settle the issue. If you read my AfD nominations, you will see that on many of them I explicitly advocated merger, thereby risking rebuke from the people who deplore a AfD nominator making a !vote.
  Sadly, you assumed bad faith, and made accusations rather than asking questions; you proceeded to put "bad faith" in bold type on several AfD pages, all because you didn't bother to ask about my intentions and preferred to assume that asking the community to decide the fate of articles for which notability was not established is a form of revenge. You could have asked for an explanation, but you didn't, so please now stay off my talk page until you withdraw all your allegations of bad faith from the AfDs pages across which you have rudely splattered them. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't want me to continue conversing on your talk page, then discontinue the conversation. I think all that needs to be said on the topic, has been said. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 07:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know what leads this man to assume that he is entitled to have the last word on my talk page.
  Let's try spelling out very simply: Norton, stay off my talk page until you withdraw all your allegations of bad faith. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Betsy Baker

I noticed that you nominated James Henry Brett Jr. for deletion review, and I think you may be interested in the Betsy Baker nom. Oh, and I know thatBHG has been harassing you; she's done the same to me recently. ''[[User:Kitia|Kitia]]'' (talk) 00:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Fatsis.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Fatsis.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use 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:

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

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use 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 fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use 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, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 19:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found a free image

of this person. Will upload sometime soon. Miranda 07:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ipswich clams

Hi, the rules for dab pages say that there should be a blue link on every record, so you needed to link to clam ... or, as I found by a bit of search, to Soft-shell clam. PamD (talk) 08:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Fauset.jpg

Mr. Norton, I've a question regarding this image. It is listed as a "copyrighted image," but by its seemingly apparent age, it may be public domain. Do you know the date when it was published, or the date when it was taken? This image may qualify as public domain, as described by Template:PD-US, and if it dos, it would be nice to fix this. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!--Vox Rationis (Talk | contribs) 02:54, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

Blessed editing, and...

Marlith ^T/C 05:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Topless Sun Tanning

You redirected this article which currently has an open AFD discussion here. If you believe a consensus has been reached please close the AFD conversation. Thank you Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 19:09, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I'll add on that note, don't you perhaps think a better redirect would have been to Suntanning, as it was the subject, not the adjective, of the article? Keeper | 76 22:16, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Inherent notability

Wikipedia:Inherent notability, a page you created, 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/Wikipedia:Inherent notability and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Inherent notability during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.--12 Noon ^2¢ 01:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing a warning about copyright violation without comment or reply

I am disturbed by your removal, without comment or reply, of my warning to you about the copyright violation you added to Wikipedia in March 2007. I respectfully request a response to this. What were you thinking adding text from an arbitrary website without any permission, and have you done it elsewhere? JesseW, the juggling janitor 04:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

My apologies, I didn't realize you were disturbed. Thank you. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 09:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

George Poe

I'm delighted to see someone taking such an interest in an article I started. However, is Mary Elizabeth Ellicott Poe (1874-?) really his sister? If so, surely she's not in the 1860 census!--Bedivere (talk) 18:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks.--Bedivere (talk) 20:21, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template

Template:Brantley_County,_Georgia

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Coronet 193611.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Coronet 193611.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Eddie Schneider 1930.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Eddie Schneider 1930.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Fair use rationale for Image:Scarabengine.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Scarabengine.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

George Poe

Looks good. I still find "Mary Elizabeth Ellicott Poe (1874-?)" odd; it seems unlikely that his parents would have had another child when they were over 60. Why does she have the same name as her sisters? I suppose they could have died. Since Arthur Ostrander was born in 1895, he couldn't have been 10 in 1907.--Bedivere (talk) 12:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Eichmann 001.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Eichmann 001.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).

Coker

Are you aware Coker did not graduate from Rutgers? — Rlevse • Talk • 22:56, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:1 article.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:1 article.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Thinboy00 @068, i.e. 00:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:HalRoach 001a.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:HalRoach 001a.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Thinboy00 @074, i.e. 00:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Balchen 01.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Balchen 01.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Thinboy00 @075, i.e. 00:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

I've started a discussion about your uploads at WP:ANI. --Thinboy00 @088, i.e. 01:07, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image on Adolf Eichmann

I've posted a note about the image you put on the article about Eichmann here. I'm simply unsure if the image you've posted or the one placed after it qualify for inclusion on Wikipedia. AniMate 08:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, are you sure this was correct? I'm not the biggest image expert, but as I understand it, it's the copyright of the original photo, not the site you get it from, that matters. In other words, if I put a public domain photo on my website and claim copyright for it, that doesn't change the original copyright of the photo. But if you know something I don't here, definitely point me to the policy. Thanks much, Delldot on a public computer (talk) 07:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:7930268109358029962.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:7930268109358029962.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. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Balchen 01.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Balchen 01.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).

Historical images - fair use rationales

Hi there. I noticed the historical images thread at ANI. Would you be interested in using Template:Historic fur or rewriting the wording from there for the images you are fixing? Carcharoth (talk) 16:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes I really appreciate the views of an inclusionist

So would you think that the objections being raised towards Nikki Catsouras at WP:DYK are invalid? Do you think this article should even be included at all? I think it should due to media coverage over a significant period of time.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 22:42, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See discussion here if you're interested.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 15:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Walter O'Malley GA on hold

We have a very specific short list of topics to address to get a GA at Talk:Walter O'Malley. In my extensive expereience with GAs, I find this list to be a more research intensive hold than I am use to. Thus, I will try to assist, but I will really be riding shotgon for this one. Let me know what I can do to help.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 18:30, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, I did not clean up the article so well and the reviewer has another round of comments. I think we have another seven days from yesterday. You may be able to get involved before the time expires with your specially ordered NYT articles.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:51, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting this article going.

This user helped promote Walter O'Malley to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 16:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been redirected by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [4]. Even if you have not, other opinions are needed because this issue is affecting all TV episodes in Wikipedia. --Maniwar (talk) 02:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of syndromes and diseases with unknown etiologies

An editor has nominated List of syndromes and diseases with unknown etiologies, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of syndromes and diseases with unknown etiologies and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Schneider 02.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Schneider 02.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Smith-Ormond 1933 obit.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Smith-Ormond 1933 obit.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:StreetSmith mars.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:StreetSmith mars.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

WikiProject Germany Invitation

Hello, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )! I'd like to call your attention to the WikiProject Germany and the German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board. I hope their links, sub-projects and discussions are interesting and even helpful to you. If not, I hope that new ones will be.

--Zeitgespenst (talk) 16:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joshua Tree debate

Your opinion on the Joshua Tree debate?Kevin Borland, Esq. (talk) 07:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Deletion of all fair use images of living people

Wikipedia:Deletion of all fair use images of living people, a page you created, 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/Wikipedia:Deletion of all fair use images of living people and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Deletion of all fair use images of living people during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. _→AzaToth 16:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:FAG2

A tag has been placed on Template:FAG2 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:1938_Hawks_Obituary.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:1938_Hawks_Obituary.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. Nv8200p talk 02:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SkyChief.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:SkyChief.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. Nv8200p talk 02:25, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Frank_Hawks_15.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Frank_Hawks_15.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. Nv8200p talk 02:25, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:1930_hawks.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:1930_hawks.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. Nv8200p talk 02:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Frederick K. Humphreys

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Frederick K. Humphreys, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 18:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Brice missing clipping.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Brice missing clipping.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Buck 8638926110759397307.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Buck 8638926110759397307.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:8638926109293340256.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:8638926109293340256.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:8638926109296632553.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:8638926109296632553.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:8638926110645497374.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:8638926110645497374.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:8638926110664343969.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:8638926110664343969.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Coronet 193611.jpg

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Eddie Schneider 1930.jpg

Abusing the truth

Hi Richard,

I am tired of User:Abuse truth. I asked not to revert but to discuss in talk:Indictment: The McMartin Trial and he reverted nonetheless and merely posted the same nonsense in that talk he had posted in a previous edit summary.

I've left an identical note to Arthur Rubin. What can be done with this behavior? I mean it. How is it possible that as to date the WP community has been unable to ban this blatant pov pushing of the most grotesque conspiracy theories with no disciplinary action whatsoever?

—Cesar Tort 05:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LOTD

If you get a chance, come vote at User:TonyTheTiger/List_of_the_Day/voting/200803. We are attempting to show the viability of a List of the Day feature for WP.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 06:06, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:StreetSmith mars.jpg

Speedy deletion of Carl Otto Nordensvan

A tag has been placed on Carl Otto Nordensvan 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 or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's 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. Ale_Jrb^talk 20:47, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Carl Otto Nordensvan

I'm not trying to be a dick; but you're not a newbie, and you know that an article without any assertion of notability is going to be knocked out pretty quickly. If you've got some sources, or even naked unsourced assertions of notability, please put them into the next version of the article. Honestly, I don't want to get into some kind of feud with somebody who actually understands the place of Street & Smith in publishing history. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:06, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of George Edward Alcorn, Jr.

A tag has been placed on George Edward Alcorn, Jr. 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 or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 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. ukexpat (talk) 20:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the speedy on this, since it did claim notability, and i rewrote the whole thing to remove the extensive copyvio. I'm not the least sure how it would do at AfD, but that;'s another matter. Are there any published papers? Are there any references to his patents? DGG (talk) 23:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Saint Stephen Crown.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Saint Stephen Crown.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, then 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, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

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 23:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 23:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC) (Sorry for the template)[reply]

March 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Barnegat Township, New Jersey do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 19:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Van Nest - Weston Burying Ground, Bound Brook

Why does it say Bound Brook when this cemetery is nowhere near Bound Brook? Perhaps it should just be called Van Nest - Weston Burying Ground. -24.149.203.34 (talk) 23:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Members and associates of the United States National Academy of Sciences

I have nominated Category:Members and associates of the United States National Academy of Sciences (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to [[:Category:]] ([[[:Template:Fullurl::Category:]] edit] | [[Category talk:|talk]] | [[[:Template:Fullurl::Category:]] history] | links | [[[:Template:Fullurl::Category:]] watch] | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. emerson7 01:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited!

	New York City Meetup Next: Sunday March 16th, Columbia University area Last: 1/13/2008 This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, and have salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).

Well also make preparations for our exciting Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, a free content photography contest for Columbia University students planned for Friday March 28 (about 2 weeks after our meeting).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

You're also invited to subscribe to the public Wikimedia New York City mailing list, which is a great way to receive timely updates.
This has been an automated delivery because you were on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 03:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:8638926111187239469.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:8638926111187239469.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).

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Schneider 02.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Schneider 02.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).

Orphaned non-free media (Image:8638926109306815631.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:8638926109306815631.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).

Orphaned non-free media (Image:8638926109297753590.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:8638926109297753590.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).

Orphaned non-free media (Image:8638926110119143437.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:8638926110119143437.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).

Orphaned non-free media (Image:8638926109294224911.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:8638926109294224911.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).

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Eddie Schneider 1937.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Eddie Schneider 1937.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).

Orphaned non-free media (Image:NewarkSchneider14 copy.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:NewarkSchneider14 copy.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).

Orphaned non-free media (Image:8638926109356826516.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:8638926109356826516.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).

WS Collaboration project

G'day, this weeks Wikisource collaboration project is G. W. Bush. If you have some time this week, it would be great to have an extra hand, even if you only have time to identify some important works that should be transcribed. John Vandenberg (talk) 03:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Al Lewis 01.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Al Lewis 01.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" 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 for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator 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.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree McGhee image

Richard, the image you added back has likely copyright problems; James W. McGhee.jpg; so I nominated it for deletion. Of course, if you know who the photographer, was, and can add info to fix it, please do. Dicklyon (talk) 03:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Al Lewis 01.jpg

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nancy Hopkins 04.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Nancy Hopkins 04.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" 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 for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Nancy Hopkins 06.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Nancy Hopkins 06.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" 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 for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

Image copyright problem with Image:RulonCAllredBookPhoto.gif

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:RulonCAllredBookPhoto.gif. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 22:53, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Annie Lee Moss

If you can't explain and justify your edits, then you are admitting that they are meaningless and unjustifiable. Continuing to make edits that you admit are meaningless and unjustifiable is, shall we say, not the most intelligent behavior imaginable. RedSpruce (talk) 01:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Richard_Arthur_Norton_(1958-_)&oldid=197134722"

@@ Line 711: / Line 711: @@
 If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. [[User:STBotI|STBotI]] ([[User talk:STBotI|talk]]) 22:53, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
+== Annie Lee Moss ==
+If you can't explain and justify your edits, then you are admitting that they are meaningless and unjustifiable. Continuing to make edits that you admit are meaningless and unjustifiable is, shall we say, not the most intelligent behavior imaginable. [[User:RedSpruce|RedSpruce]] ([[User talk:RedSpruce|talk]]) 01:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)