User talk:Mark J

Please note, I am only 16. If you don't understand my edits and comments or they seem a bit silly, it's not my fault. I'm only a kid.

Rowley's Hill

This article ends with some sort of cliffhanger: Although of only moderate height (50m/164ft), it has a high prominence because it — Mind adding the reason for its prominence? Rl 20:07, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

COTW Project

You voted for High Middle Ages, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

Edit summary

Hello. Please remember to always provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy edits. Alphax ^τεχ 3 July 2005 08:50 (UTC)

Stybarrow Dodd image

Hi there! Just a word about images; the one of Stybarrow Dodd you uploaded seems likely to be copyrighted - after all it has the web address for www.go4awalk.com on it. Unless you have got proof they allow us to use it we'll have to remove it I'm afraid.

In future when you upload images, make sure you use an Image tag. Thanks, and cheers for the various hill pages; good work pal! Grinner 10:23, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Hi there again! Unfortunately it is not that simple - a picture is copyrighted, and you can't use it for anything without that copyright holder's permission. You need to search around the webiste you get an image from and see what they say. For example, I have used picture from Ann Bowker's website quite a lot. If you hunt around you'll find that she says: "you are welcome to copy and use these pictures but please credit the photographer - Ann Bowker - or better still include a link to my homepage mad about mountains". So I use the image tag {{Attribution}}:

If you look at go4awalk.com they say:

3.3 You are permitted to print and download extracts from this site only on the following bases: 
a. use of documents and related graphics on this site is for personal use only; 
b. any copies of these pages saved to disk or to any other storage medium may only be used for subsequent viewing purposes or to print extracts for personal use; 
c. no part of this site may be reproduced or stored in any other Website or included in any public or private electronic retrieval system or service without go4awalk.com or TMDH Limited's prior written permission. 

I know it is very compliacted, but copyright lawyers can be very nasty! Sorry about the lecture, keep writing about hills mate, just be careful about images! Grinner 10:08, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sandbox/Poetry

I just wanted to bring to your attention the following page: wikicities:c:poetry:Sandbox Poetry (from Wikipedia). JesseW 22:08, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

The hill infoboxes

Anything to add to the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mountains/General#From_Template_talk:Infobox_british_hills_.28no_image.29 as regrds the infoboxes we use for hill articles? Grinner 09:49, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Kirk Fell image

Hi. I'm almost certain that the caption of the image you've included at Kirk Fell is slightly incorrect, and that the viewpoint is on the north-east slopes of Illgill Head, rather than on the slopes of Scafell Pike, at about NY176051 – while I suppose one could argue that Illgill Head is a continuation of Scafell Pike, most would agree that Illgill Head is a separate fell starting south-west of the Burnmoor Tarn col. For comparison, I've put a 3D picture created with aerial photography in Anquet Maps here [1] based at the above grid reference. StephenDawson 19:02, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

I've taken the plunge and edited the image caption. StephenDawson 18:43, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Template:UK-hill-stub

Very good idea that one pal! I will make a little adjustment though - I think mountain should come before hill i the category, since that is how the parent category is named. Now to work on finding 'em! Grinner 21:04, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Very BAD idea, as explained when you proposed the stub type. It has taken a lot of extra effort from the stub sorters to repair the mess that this new category made to the UK geography stub categories. Please desist from using it. The stub type is now up for deletion. Grutness...wha? 07:42, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Happy thoughts

OK so UK-hill-stub didn't work out (I still think it is a good idea, the policy is wrong!), hope it hasn't scared you off. :-) Grinner 10:43, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Re:Apology about hill stubs

Hi Mark J. You wrote DONT GET ANGRY WITH ME. I went ahead with the stupid thing right after I proposed it because I couldn't find/be bothered to wait for the proposals page again. Kinda thought I was doing everyone a favor sorting out the mess that you guys have got, and it certainly helps some people (see Grinner above). I didn't even put most of the stubs in the stupid category anyway.

I was angry with you because you deliberately went against the procedure. If my anger was misplaced, I apologise, but it caused a hell of a lot of extra work and time, which could have been taken up on more productive stub sorting. As for you not populating the category, no-one would have populated it if you hadn't made it in the first place - and "couldn't be bothered to wait" is hardly a good excuse. As for Grinner's suggestion that the policy is wrong, the best way to change a policy is to discuss why you think it is wrong and attempt to change opinion that way - not to go against policy and then try to explain afterwards. Grutness...wha? 09:03, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Re: Re: Apology

Sorry. I wrote the 'apology' in a tearing hurry. I admit that i did the wrong thing, only trying to help.

Fair enough. And I'm sorry that my responses probably just made things worse. Truce? :) Grutness...wha? 23:10, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Adding a pronunciation parameter to {{Infobox_british_hills}} will probably cause problems, since all the hills without pronunciations will look bad. Another solution would be to create separate templates, like {{Infobox_british_hills_pronunciation}} and so on, but we don't really want to increase the number of templates in use for every new idea we have. What we can do is to agree on a method for incorporating pronunciation information into the existing infoboxes. Perhaps in small type under the name in the first row of the header, something like this:

Y Lliwedd pron.: /ə ɬɪwɛð/

It might even be possible via a transcluded template, so that "Y Lliwedd {{Infobox_pron|ə ɬɪwɛð}}" produced the above output.

{{subst:Mtnbox topo|Ordnance SurveyLandranger 115}}

Y Lliwedd
File:012 Y something next to snowdon.jpg Y Lliwedd from Snowdon
Elevation:	898 m (2946 ft)
Location:	Snowdonia, Wales
Prominence:	154m
OS grid reference:	NN166713
Listing:	Marilyn (hill), Hewitt
Pronunciation:	/ə ɬɪwɛð/

Problems like this would, incidentally, be solved if we used the approach put forward by User:hike395 for using the generic mountain box format. Then, it would simply be a case of creating a row (e.g. the {{Mtnbox_pronunciation}} that I've been playing with) and inserting it where required in the infobox. A mock-up is shown on the right.

Either solution seems acceptable to me, but I would insist on the use of IPA. I've lost track of the number of times I've read stupid things like "Yr Wyddfa (pronounced urr-weeth-var)", which are of no use to anybody. Adding IPA to pages is tiresome, but the only reasonable way of preserving the real pronunciation.

--Stemonitis 08:16, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Another possibility, which, for some reason, I've only just thought of, is to put the pronunciation information in the text, and not in the infobox. Simple, eh? --Stemonitis 08:23, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Regarding IPA, I realise that most people don't know it, but that's why I put the link there; anyone can go to the IPA article, click on the relevant symbol, and be told what words in English and other languages use that sound. I really think it's the only way. For instance, there is no other good way of representing the /ɬ/ sound. --Stemonitis 07:23, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I quite like the ide of an optional row, as Stem has suggested. We should probably suggeest it at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mountains/General first though. Grinner 19:28, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I like the optional row, too. Sadly, it means converting all of the British hills infobox template calls over to multiple Mtnbox template calls. This is not impossible, it's just a lot of work. Since I'm on WikiHoliday, I don't want to do this myself. -- hike395 15:55, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

I'd say the point is that not all the hills would need it. We could transfer those that require a pronunciation field across. Over time the number of peaks using the infobox would shrink, making eventual complete conversion easier. Grinner 08:45, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

OK, nobody said anything against the idea, so I'm going to put it into a few hills then. Grinner 10:10, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

In the end I ran into trouble with the symbols for IPA pronunciation, so I gave up. Grinner 15:10, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Category: British Hills by Height

Don't know if you noticed Category: British Hills by Height, but this category has ben produced, it makes a list of all British hills in height order by using the infobox. It has now been proposed for deletion. You might have an opinion one way or the other, so check out Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2005_September_1#Category:Mountains_by_Elevation_.28km.29_and_its_subcategories if you like. Grinner 15:10, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

England-geo-stubs

Hi Mark - you might want to hold off on moving stubs from UK-geo-stub to England-geo-stub for a while... a lot of the ones you're moving are only going to be moved again shortly, because there are currently eight counties being split off, and a few more will be in a week or so - probably 500 stubs won't need moving across to the England category. Hang on for a couple of weeks and you'll save yourself a lot of work! Grutness...wha? 11:15, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikithanks! for Snowdon

Mark: I hereby award you this Wikithanks for being bold and editing Snowdon to include pronunciation. This is a good idea: we need to take a first step in converting British Hill articles over to Mtnbox templates. Thanks!!! -- hike395 04:24, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Bit of help please! Can you tell me which codes equate to which IPA symbol? Is there a list you are using or something? Grinner 09:28, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Oh, and it seems a shame that changeing over means that we can't have double infoboxes. I'm going to ask about this at the Wiki Project.Grinner 10:20, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Apologies for being thick, I hadn't noticed you recent additions to my talk page! I will go and do some hills. Oh and just noticed the changes to your User Page, a belated happy birthday!Grinner 13:00, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Double hill info boxes

I'm going to change the double hill template to include pronuciation, and then re-inser it into Beinn Eighe etc. Hope this is cool. It seems people are happy with it as a special case, and it was a shame to loose the additional summits. Also, I've found Template:Mtnbox_start_nopic_norange, which will be useful for turning over other infoboxes without pictures into the Mtnbox format. Grinner 11:06, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Beinn Eighe

Hello, The big pic is not Ruadh-stac Mor, it's Sgurr an Fhir Duibhe and the Black Carls. RegardsGillean666 11:25, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Pronunciation of "bathe".

I saw that you asked Nohat about this and he didn't give you such a clear answer. The reason the vowel that sounds "ay" is not on the IPA vowel chart is because that vowel is a diphthong (double vowel). The two vowel sounds in the word "bathe" are on the chart separately. I assume you mean [this chart].--LiuLanDi 05:59, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Hill names that share

I think the general position is to prefer a comma rather that brackets, but I don't think it's set in stone. Grinner 09:04, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

English hill parentage

I notice you've been updating the List of Marilyns in England with full relative height information. Once again (didn't we discuss this at List of peaks by prominence?), I wonder what the meaning of parent is. Relative height is all about differences between ring contours and the highest points within them, as I see it. Thus, the highest point within a certain 445m contour is the summit of High Stile and that point is at 807m, giving it a relative height of 362m. That contour touches another (at, by definition, a col), whose highest contained point is the summmit of Scafell Pike at 978m. When thinking about it that way, one can't help but see Scafell Pike as the parent peak to High Stile, and not Great Gable. But then, I've always thought about it that way, so I my be blind to the advantages of the alternatives. --Stemonitis 11:39, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Great picture resource

I've found a great website: [2]. They aim to have a photo from every 1km grid square in Britain, and all the images are licensed as Creative Commons Attribution, so they are suitable for use on wikipedia. I have addded some to some hill pages, just thought I'd let you know. If you find any to use, remember to put the photographer's name and the code {{cc-by-sa-2.0}} in the information section of the uploading page. Grinner 09:16, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Kirkfell.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Kirkfell.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, ie in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{gfdl}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{fairuse}}.) See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much.

You helped choose {{subst:IDRIVEtopic article}} as this week's WP:ACID winner

-- Mamawrites 00:08, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Loughrigg.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Loughrigg.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, ie in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{gfdl}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{fairuse}}.) See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. --Secretlondon 17:48, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Eskdale

Thanks for removing my picture of Eskdale. A picture I remind you that I took and is not barred from Wikipeda by copyright like the one you have replaced it with. Better picture - I think not - that picture is clearly lifted from another website and is subject to copyright. Seems you make a habit of doing this sort of thing. Think you ought to put the original picture back which is far better anyway. Then again I might do it myself. Mick Knapton 14:13, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Emergency department

I wonder if you would consider supporting Emergency department atWikipedia:Article Improvement Drive. This department is where we all go if we are very ill, and I feel it needs a boost if it is ever to get featured article status. I would greatly appreciate if you were able to offer support on this.--File Éireann 15:50, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

panoramas

How did you find those very cool panoramas? (I came across your links in some White Mountain, NH peaks). What an excellent site that is. - DavidWBrooks 16:54, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Panoramas 'Spam'

Hiya Mark, I don't wish to upset anyone and true, the panoramas themselves are quite informative, but that third paragraph of the opening page:- A CD containing all the panoramas listed below can be supplied for £5. Also 360° panoramas from customer specified locations can be ordered. These are priced at £12 per viewpoint if e-mailed, £16 if sent on CD and £20 if sent printed and encapsulated. There is an overhead charge of £3 per order to cover p&p/admin. For contact details click here really smacks of commercialism. If you would link just to the panoramas, that would be fine. BTW I admire all your other contributions to british hills. Regards Gillean666 11:25, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

-- No it is not commercialism. The above prices are based on reproduction cost. Btw the USGS charge $45 for CD's and $60 for DVD's for data based on "cost of reproduction". The labour cost of creating panoramas from customer specified viewpoints justifies the price of these. Please be less trigger happy, Gillean. Jonathan de Ferranti, author of the panoramas.

No one else seems to be objecting to the links so it seems I may have been a little hasty, please feel free to revert my edits.-Gillean666 13:38, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi Mark, I may need your support again! See [here]. Someone seems to think that SRTM evidence is not permissible... if that is so then you will need to take down all your prominence lists as they belong in the field of original research Viewfinder 11:32, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I'd just like to pip in here and say I have trouble finding the usefulness in all those linked panoramas. Additionally the commercial aspect is way off too. Remember WP:EL#What should not be linked to... If the copyright of these images was such that they could be added to WP itself, then... Thanks/wangi 21:50, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Right, I'll take it to Viewfinder's page, although you are the one adding the links! Although I am going to remove at least the link from the Forth Road Bridge article - having a panorama of peaks visable from a peak is one thing, but from a bridge!? Thanks/wangi 17:20, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Geograph photos

Might I suggest you upload the CC photos from geograph.org.uk to Wikimedia Commons rather than here - generally if the copyrights allow it (and they do in this case) it is much better to upload to commons because the image can then be used easily by all the Wikipedia projects.

In any case you are tagging the photos with {{cc-by-2.5}}, this is wrong - you should be using {{cc-by-sa-2.0}}, which matches the licence used on the geograph site itself.

I've uploaded quite a few photos from geograph myself (e.g. Image:RRS Discovery.jpg, Image:Loganair Islander at Fair Isle.jpg, Image:Barra Airport, control tower.jpg, ...) and managed to cause quite a stir in the process too: http://www.geograph.org.uk/discuss/index.php?&action=vthread&forum=2&topic=1118! That's one of the reasons it's important to get the copyright stuff 100% right!

A great resource though, yeah?

Thanks/wangi 17:12, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

No, 2.0 is different to 2.5. What I do is leave the licence at the default setting, and in the Summary field put in all the info I want. For example with Image:RRS Discovery.jpg I added today I entered:

[[RRS Discovery]] was built and launched in [[Dundee]] in 1901. It took [[Captain Scott]] to the [[Antarctic]] in the same year.

Alternatively just edit the summary afterward and change the licence template to {{cc-by-sa-2.0}}. Thanks/wangi 19:03, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I've added a {{geograph}} template to Commons. I tagged Image:De Havilland Aircraft Museum Hertfordshire.jpg as an example. - Crosbiesmith 15:38, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Marilyns of England

Just wanted to thank you for the work you're putting into tabulating the page - it is appreciated! Grinner 10:12, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

List of wikipedians by number of edits

Hi, im an active contributor in es: wikipedia. I'm interested in generating a list like you did, but dumping in wikimedia download does not include information about users (user table). How did you generate it? I prefer you to answer it in my es: wikipedia discussion page. Thanks so much. --Porao 23:00, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Word Association

Hey, Mark! When you update the word-count, please don't forget to also update the "as of <word>" section. That helps us know when someone has forgotten to update. Thanks! (...tanks, war, raw, meat, ) Peter T.S. 16:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Caer Caradoc.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Caer Caradoc.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or {{fairuse}}. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by going to "Your contributions" from your user page and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. --Steve block talk 21:23, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Geograph template

Cheers for that, I hadn't seen it before. I will certainly make use of it. Grinner 12:18, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

geograph

What follows is somewhat nit-picking because I have to admit that the images you have copied from geograph have been marked with source and licence information in an exemplary manner - and better than Grinner has been doing. But please from now on: always remember to upload to the commons and always use the {{geograph}} tag.

Further may I suggest that if you have any spare time, please:

• go through what you have already uploaded to the commons and convert to use the {{geograph}} tag
• go through what you have already uploaded here, the English wikipedia. I would not suggest you re-upload them to the commons but again if you could add a {{geograph}} tag to each one it would help.

Using the tag puts the image into a category for images from geograph which, if nothing else, may help to catch double uploads such as you have done with: Image:Bishop of Barf.jpg - Image:The Bishop of Barf.jpg and Image:The Cheviot.jpg - Image:The Cheviot Summit.jpg.

-- RHaworth 20:44, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Note, i've now updated {{geograph}} here to match the commons version. Thanks/wangi 22:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Marilyn maps

Just to say, I'm liking your maps of the English Marilyns. Good work, as always! Grinner 12:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

So they got deleted eh, b*gger. Grinner 14:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Raise.jpg

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Raise.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stan 04:55, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:St_sunday2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:St_sunday2.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact Carnildo or ask for help at Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. Thank you.

Main page redesign article count

It seems that your motion for including the article count in the main page redesign won out, and has now been included on the project page. Would you consider changing your vote from "Conditional Support" to "Support" now? Fieari 22:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Dollywaggonpike.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Dollywaggonpike.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 21:15, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:HighRigg.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:HighRigg.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 12:55, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Knott.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Knott.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then 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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 22:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Mellbreak.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mellbreak.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 14:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Defacation

Mark J, I have an urgent message. A person with the I.P. address of 210.212.45.144 has made some serious defacations to the wikipedian website. We need to stop and revert this man's edits NOW. Pass on this message.

New game

Hey Mark J. This is Starhood`, and as a fellow genius, I wanted to show you a new game from the sandbox. It's called Diplomacy. Why don't you check it out? It's very good.

Target

Um, Mark. I really hate to be the one who's saying this but you're painting a BIG red bullseye on yourself. Please don't add information to your home page on who you are but what you are. Thanks. Starhood` 21:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Football

Hi! Hope you aren't pissed off on me for nominating your article List of football teams by World Cup performance for deletion. Nothing wrong with the article itself except that it is original research. I just wanted to say that I hope that you keep contributing to the football articles on Wikipedia, and that if you seek assistance on Wiki-football matters, the WikiProject on Football is here to help! – Elisson • Talk 16:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, ditto to above and I hope you don't mind me removing the various references to it in nation's articles. It IS quite an interesting list though --Robdurbar 16:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Will you quit adding that bloody table to 1930 World Cup, it has been removed above 5 times now and it is going to be removed againg. It was a knockout competition. Jooler 02:12, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes it seems it was you! In this edit [3]

Taking out the points wouldn't really help either. If you want to include material like this, please discuss in the article's talk page and try to gain consensus there. I know I have deleted this table at least twice already and it is irritating to see it being reinserted without dialogue and seemingly against common sense; the tournament was a knockout one, so a league table seems spurious and misleading. --Guinnog 10:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Sorry. Jooler 16:51, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

You replied to my comment (I think) on Jooler's talk page by mistake. Please seek consensus in talk for any further additions of this type you might be tempted to make in the future. With or without the points. Thanks, --Guinnog 15:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I found the table via your user page. I have updated it and added some comments. Viewfinder 22:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

"Hewitts" in Scotland

Hi Mark, I see you added the section about hills of Hewitt status in Scotland to Hewitt (hill) (which I've now merged into Hill lists in the British Isles). Do you have a source for such a list (I'm assuming it wasn't the dreaded original research)? If so could you cite it in the article, or let me know? I've moved the section to the talk page for the time being, as "a survey has recently been completed" doesn't really stand up to WP:VERIFY. Cheers, Blisco 20:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

You helped choose Wall Street Crash of 1929 as this week's WP:ACID winner

AzaBot 01:08, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nestene consciousness.jpg

Hello Mark J, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Nestene consciousness.jpg) was found at the following location: User:Mark J/Sandbox. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 02:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Ceol and Ceolwulf

Hi -- I saw you recreated Ceol of Wessex and Ceolwulf of Wessex as separate articles. I recently merged them to Wessex after a merge discussion at Talk:Wessex#Suggested_merges. (Only one other person commented.) Did you miss this, or do you think the merge was a mistake? I'd still like to keep them merged -- there's nothing more to say about these guys. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 21:05, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, no problem; if you find more then sure, an article is worth it. On Ine of Wessex, I've reverted your note about Aethelheard possibly having married Cwenburg -- the article is a featured article candidate right now, so I'm trying to keep it properly sourced. Can you tell me where you got that information? As far as I know, the only reference to this is in a charter which is known to be forged, and I didn't think it specified whether Aethelburh was Aethelheard's sister, or Aethelheard married Cwenburg or another sister we don't know of. Anyway, let me know -- if there's a good source it would be great to add it. Mike Christie (talk) 12:28, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the family tree looks good. I haven't gone through it to see where you got the data -- before Egbert things get a bit speculative; the various genealogies disagree quite a bit. But as far as I can tell from a quick look, it's an asset. Mike Christie (talk) 22:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Peak parents

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains#New row added: Parent_peak. Thanks. Ben MacDui (Talk) 12:13, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Juan Carlos

Encyclopedic biographies generally exist to provide an account of the subject's life and situate his actions in history, not to hit the reader over the head with the fact that he's descended from a really really really long royal line. Of course that descent set the King up for his position, but it had no (or only a peripheral) effect on his actions in office. Let's look at a professional biography of a royal, shall we? We're told who his parents were and that's essentially it -- not even his royal house is explicitly mentioned. So, if you truly want to stick that long and essentially trivial list into House of Bourbon, I suppose it's an option, but really, I'd say let's direct our efforts toward prose-building. Biruitorul (talk) 22:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Earliest documented people. Please use the {{hangon}} template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion. Thank you. --Nehwyn (talk) 13:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Descent of Elizabeth II from the Romans

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Descent of Elizabeth II from the Romans, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Descent of Elizabeth II from the Romans. Pumpmeup^{(is awake!)} 18:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Royal houses of Europe

Template:Royal houses of Europe 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. — Charles 05:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Hutton's Unconformity

A tag has been placed on Hutton's Unconformity requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 11:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if you saw my note on the talk page, but a reference indicating that Arran is the site of "Hutton's Unconformity" (as opposed to just one of them, would be helpful. Either that or expand the article to include any others. There is no rush as such, but it would be helpful to have an early indication of your intentions. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 21:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Earliest documented people

An article that you have been involved in editing, Earliest documented people, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Earliest documented people. Thank you. cjllw ʘ TALK 00:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Firle Beacon

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Firle Beacon, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Firle Beacon. brewcrewer (yada, yada) 19:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:War of the Spanish Succession family tree.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:War of the Spanish Succession family tree.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.

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:Non-free content, 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 16:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 16:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

War of the spanish succession family tree

Sorry, I didn't see that was you the author. To easily denotes that I put the {{self}} with your license tag. Sorry, again. --Sdrtirs (talk) 18:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello Mark J

• Can I point you to the discussion on the talk page of User:RHaworth and ask you if you have an opinion on the subject of county High points as we need a consensus on the subject. Many thanks Stavros1 (talk) 19:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:German monarchs family tree.jpg

Awesome image! With data type images, it's often a good idea to cite your sources. I assume you got the info from a history book? On an unrelated note, I'm looking across into the Lake District from where I am sitting, so it's nice to see someone who writes about my local area. J Milburn (talk) 11:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, yeah, that's fine then. Keep up the good work! J Milburn (talk) 11:32, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Catstye Cam

I saw you edited the Catstye Cam article recently. Having added one of my images to the German article, I thought you might like this in the English article as well (I don not want to edit it because I dont have an English Wikipedia account). I could not find anything like it on Wikipediy Commons, though I think it's a very fine view on the mountain. --79.210.187.15 (talk) 11:43, 22 June 2008 (UTC)