User talk:Anna Frodesiak

If I started a thread on your talk page, I am watching. Please reply there. To leave me a message click here.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60

Weight Mate Forklifts

Anna,

It looks like you uploaded an article about Allis Chalmers Weight Mate forklift (http://speedydeletion.wikia.com/wiki/weightmate). I am looking for some documentation because I just bought one. Since Allis Chalmers went out of business in 1985 documentation is hard to come by.

Any help of guidance at to where you got the article would be appreciated.

David — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.16.78.193 (talk) 20:43, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure which image. Is it this? If not, please see the gallery of images I uploaded here: [1]

Anyway, if I did upload such an image, I wouldn't know much about the forklift. You can always ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. There are really helpful folks over there. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:05, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alumni pages

Hi,

I couldn't help but noticed that there are several very short alumni pages on Sri Lankan schools. In fact I moved one that I had created myself some time back. What do you make of these;

Cossde (talk) 14:01, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What I said at User talk:Wo2gana#List of alumni applies to all of those. I think if visitors to the main articles were polled, 99% would find the list articles more convenient as a section in the article. To me, that's the main consideration. What do you think? I can be swayed. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, most of these parent articles are small. Moving these sub articles into them would make them more meaning full and as you say convenient. Cossde (talk) 18:20, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Urination topic

I am sorry you find my edits unconstructive. However that is a question of opinion, please refer to POV. You should not remove edits without a reasonable explanation.Sevendigits (talk) 15:28, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a question of opinion or POV. I added the gentle comment to your talk page: Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Urination did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. in response to your addition of:

Some men also urinate while orgasming, expelling a substance called sperine with a strong odour of cod. Cod? Really? Not halibut, because I've smelled them both, and eyes closed, pretty much the same thing? And "sperine" doesn't google and you provided no source.

and...

Your addition of synonyms for urination taking the piss, passing the water, which are both incorrect.

I think my response was entirely appropriate. Looking at User:Sevendigits, I'm not sure if this is a language issue, or you are taking the piss. I will assume good faith. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:57, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure that should have been spermine, present in ejaculation, questionable about urination, and as for identification of seafood, this "fish" has no opinion. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:57, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Checking out spermine led me to spermidine then to putrescine then to cadaverine. Don't these boffins have anything better to do? They must have stunk up the whole lab when they discovered these.

This is by far the most disgusting thread in the known universe. Yuk!!! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:14, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have a PhD in boffinism, and I can attest that labs can get rather smelly. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New articles

Check out the new List of fermented foods article, and feel free to improve it. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One more new one: List of drinking games! Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:57, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They look good!! I'll see what I can do. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:13, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kewl, and thanks. Northamerica1000^(talk) 23:28, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GravityLight

Hi, I am the author of the german article about the gravity light, and I thought, maybe you can help me. We are having a loooong discussion[2], about deleting the whole article or not. The first issue was relevance, after that we talked about publicity. Now somebody stated, the the function of the light is not explained, so the article is useless. (not my opinion). I could not find any information about that, maybe you have some? about how the light is produced, what the mechanism inside the lamp is? Thank you --Marikke (talk) 14:08, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marikke,

I only know what the available sources say, which isn't much. But, I was in contact with the development team. That's how I got the photos. I will write to them asking for some details. Maybe ask the folks at de.wikipedia to put things on hold for a while until I can get a response. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:13, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support, I posted your answer in the discussion and hope it will help. Maybe you can send my greetings to the development team and tell them, that I like the lamp (otherwise I would not spend day after day fighting all the arguments against the article ;-) --Marikke (talk) 15:18, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. Thanks for linking here. I already sent the email linking here too, so the team will read what you just wrote above. Personally, I like the product. I think a model with a really heavy bag and higher watt light would be good. There's no shortage of clever ways to move a 50 kg bag up 4 metres. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The email statement

Jim has allowed me to post the email here:

Anna

We have not published the detail of functionality as we are still prosecuting the Patent. Once the Patent is secure and we have released trial products for the global user trial in the summer we will then be able to disclose more. Please keep an eye on deciwatt.org for updates.

Thanks and regards Jim

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:41, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I was thinking. Anna, thank you for the support. --Marikke (talk) 14:52, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:46, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Anna

I was wondering if you could take a look in Flickr for a free picture of Alison Hewson for her infobox? If possible. Please. Thanks in advance. Reply at my talk page. Thanks again. Miss Bono (zootalk) 14:24, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see nothing. You can check if you like. Use the following link. It will return only images that we can use at commons (share-alike and attribution).

http://www.flickr.com/search/?l=commderiv

Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Anna, Iwish I could. The reason why I bother you with this is 'cuz I don't have a full internet access. Are there another sites where we can find such pictures?? Cheers!! Miss Bono (zootalk) 14:33, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but this google link gives you a search box that looks for allowed images: http://www.google.ca/imghp?as_st=y&tbm=isch&hl=en&as_q=&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&cr=&as_sitesearch=&safe=active&tbs=sur:fmc

Do you have the .com instead the .ca for this link¿¿ Miss Bono (zootalk) 15:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Try swapping in .com or something. I don't remember where I got that link anyhow. I can't try .com because I'm in China and it just bounces to .hk (Hong Kong).

A Flickr caution

A caution using flickr images: If you find a really nice image that's too good to be true, you should look at other images uploaded from that user's account. If they are all from one camera then it's likely a safe bet. If the images are all different styles and from different cameras, then it's likely that the uploader doesn't actually own them. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:36, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. And for taking some of your time to help me ;) Let me know anytime if you need anything. Miss Bono (zootalk) 14:42, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And now for something completely different

I've been an editor for more than six years and I still know nothing about image policies. Not a thing. So if I've contributed to an article and I want to upload an image which will be useful to readers who want to know about the subject...I mean, where do I learn about this? Most policy pages about images are huge and intimidating. Take Abu Abd al-Rahman Ibn Aqil al-Zahiri, for example (living person). I found this image of him from his official site and these from various newspapers. Do these count as fair use or common use or whatever it is? How do I know? MezzoMezzo (talk) 15:01, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe stalkers know some sort of Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything for images. I just learned it bit by bit. I could take a shot at writing one I guess. Actually, I'm pretty sure such a nutshell page exists somewhere at the project.

As for those images, no, I don't think so. The source must state that it has the right CC license. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I’m no expert, but I gather that there are different standards for images here and on Commons. The latter must be either public-domain or released under a compatible licence (e.g. CC-BY-SA). Non-free images are allowed to illustrate a Wikipedia article, though under a number of conditions—including that they must contribute materially to the article (not mere decoration), that there are no compatibly licensed substitutes available, and that they be accompanied by a fair-use rationale (for which templates are available).—Odysseus1479 (talk) 04:52, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, this is the kind of info I was looking for. Not that I care about those images specifically, they were just examples. So...is there a place where I can learn these conditions for using otherwise non-free images? And is there a way for me to learn what public domain is? I feel kind of silly asking this considering I'm far from new, but I'm not sure how else to learn about this. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:19, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There’s a clump of links to get started with at Help:File page#Copyright information.—Odysseus1479 07:28, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the links. I'm starting to think about putting something together. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:43, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Hindu temples in Kerala may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:29, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An old chore

Hello Anna,
I just found your suggestion on Talk:List of educational institutions in Hyderabad (Pakistan). It looks like a good idea to me. There are other similar lists with the same problem. Do you want to start pruning, or shall I? bobrayner (talk) 16:22, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An oldie but a goodie. 189 edits since then. It's still a bit of a mess. I don't know where to start. Maybe we could link the lot with a macro in a sandbox to see what comes up blue, then zap what doesn't. Then again, we could just walk away from it because all of these are potentially notable and potentially sourcable. Maybe just a cleanup instead of a prune. Thoughts? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:58, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of cities in China and built-up areas

Hi Anna,

As you probably know, there are numerous ways of counting city populations which lead to impossibility of compraing agglomerations (not cities) between them. Some countries like France use the built-up area method which consist by aerial views delimiting agglomeration according to built-up area adjusted to local government Areas (http://www.insee.fr/fr/methodes/default.asp?page=definitions/unite-urbaine.htm)

For numerous countries, this doesn't exist particularly china whereas there are more than 200 "cities" or "shi" apparently with more than a million inhabitants ven though the areas describes are not comparable. This list i change, as same as the other articles on cities systematically refers tobuilt-up areaswhich are comparable between countries. Each change is checked with : - aerial views issued in (www.citypopulation.de) where for numerous countries, you can se Local Governement Areas (LGA) and sources directly on census websites, - datas issued by www.citypopulation.de. For most of the Chinese cities (http://www.citypopulation.de/China.html), it matches with geohive figures (http://www.geohive.com/cntry/cn-32.aspx) but this site allow to get accurate figures for LGA not available for all cities - statisticals found on wikipedia sometimes about each census.

Moreover the work i do for years now is also based on excel charts for each country and cities with each LGA available. Thank you in advance thus not to remove material which is unique and allow wiki users comparing agglomerations with the same definition. Franck MICHEL — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.157.231.40 (talk) 20:17, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Franck MICHEL,

I'm really sorry about all of this, and I trust you are acting in good faith. I think it's best to hear what the Wikipedia community says. Personally, I think the figures must come directly from official sources or not be included in the articles. Both www.citypopulation.de and http://www.geohive.com/contact.aspx are not reliable, although www.citypopulation.de says it gets the info from government sources, so it's better. But then why not use the same sources as they use?

The issue of measuring agglomerations is tricky, but again, official sources for figures and definitions are best.

I'm curious why, after being cautioned about not adding sources in January 2013, you continued. Please explain that.

It's probably best that you stop adding these figure until this matter is resolved. Please keep an eye on this thread: User talk:Qwyrxian#Massive.2C unsourced figure modifications to articles

Best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:39, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anna,

What do you mean by "until this matter is resolved"?.

Anyway, I find it a pity not being able to put forward to wiki users a very important amount of work for all built-up areas (thousands of charts!) in the world. maybe, it'll be possible to create a new list on List of agglmerations by built-up areas. This would solve the problem and may help to be updated by other users.

For the sourcing, it's just because I didn't know how to do until soon. Moreover, it's easier to get souces in the same website with people which avec compiled the datas in a language understandable by all (English vs russian, Hindi or Chinese...). Even if sometimes geohive or citypopulation.de de could appear inaccurate, in most case it's a lot better than "official" site which compare cities definitions that not comparable as for example municipal juridictions one one side and agglomerations based on different methodologies by country on the other. It's absolutely the case for UNO her : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_agglomerations_by_population_%28United_Nations%29 For India my sources are (http://www.census2011.co.in/census/city/) where they distinguish the city population and the one of its agglomeration or built-up area.

The work I do, using the most accurate sources on the web, is unique and I hope you'll help me to create this new listing as you did with a listing made from citypopulation charts which are calculation and proved totally unofficial and you use : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_agglomerations_by_population

I hope you'll understand and take into account what I'm saying because it would be a pity not to let the wiki users not benefit of accurate and updates statisticals about chinese built-up areas cities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_China_by_population). Franck MICHEL 21:13, 18 May 2013‎ 83.157.231.40

Hi Franck MICHEL,

Is your first name Michel? I'm not sure. :)

What I mean by "until this matter is resolved" is that I may not know best, and you may not know best. We must trust the community. They will give their opinions, and that's how this should be resolved. I and another editor dispute the use of these sources, and I strongly object to the addition of any figures with no sources. But, we may be wrong. Maybe, in the case of agglomerations, the definitions are so fuzzy that your sources are fine. I don't know. But, what we must do is wait for the community to give feedback. So, until then, which shall be soon, please take a short break. We must work by consensus here. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:23, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) In some parts of the world - especially francophone ones - it's conventional to capitalise surnames. bobrayner (talk) 21:48, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks Bob. I got it backward. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:44, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Franck: Please let's continue this matter at your talk page, okay? Thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:44, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting Deletion of redirects

Hi there, I just put in a CSD tag for those bad redirects, are they fine? Thanks! JackFrost2121(Frostbitten?/ My Work) 02:28, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not enough background for an admin, and considering you're a newcomer, they may not delete it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:33, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vishakhapatnam

Hi there, I would like to explain why I have moved the page.

Earlier the page was named "Visakhapatnam" (విశాఖపట్నం). The transliteration for letter 'శా' is 'śa'(most indians use 'sha' instead of 'śa') but old page has the spelling Vi'sa'khapatnam.

So, I mentioned in the article "(also spelled as Vishakhapatnam)" and moved the page to "Viśakhapatnam" so that it will be familiar to the people who spell it 'Visakhapatnam' or 'Vishakhapatnam' and also phonetically correct.

It takes lot of time and effort to do all this and I am doing this to make the article better and give users better understanding.

Nagarjuna198 (talk)

It's been moved back. You've been through this before. Read up on naming conventions and follow those. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:38, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Spot Checks

Namaste, Anna Frodesiak. You have got at least one new message at the Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. Please continue the discussion there!
Message added by Tito Dutta (contact) 10:41, 19 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time.[reply]

1 more new message! --Tito Dutta (contact) 13:29, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanassis Stephopoulos

Dear Anna,

I have made same changes in the article. It 's probably ready for the main space but if you think that it needs something else please let me know.

Andreas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astefopoulos (talk • contribs) 11:28, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello my friend,

I'll make a few tweaks and put it into the mainspace shortly. Good job. :)

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:11, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	For your prolific and great contributions...keep it up.....BTW your user page image is ███████ awesome Strike Σagle 14:09, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly. Writers Barnstar? You are aware, of course, that I'm functionally illiterate. The reason I spell things correctly is actually pure typing luck. The odds are astronomically low that I will get this sentence right. Kidding. Actually, I copy paste every single word from a dictionary I keep open. Anyway, it's taken me 45 minutes to type this, and I need a break. :) Thanks again, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:35, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

C'mon

Anna, the worst thing that can happen at RfA is for the community to fail itself by not recognizing your great potential. I can't even imagine that being possible. We need you as an administrator—there are no "people like you" to fill the void if it remains vacant. I'm challenging you to rise to your potential on this site; and my interest is seeing it improve. You are an unpolished diamond with a brilliance that exceeds the most splendid crown jewel. Don't be a lamp that conceals its light, allow it to shine; even so others can benefit. My76Strat (talk) 14:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Like Well put My76Strat, we need more Admins like Anna. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 14:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Like Strike Σagle 16:49, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Like and the sooner the better. AutomaticStrikeout ? 18:24, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Very nicely put. Awwww, okay, I'll think about it again.

To be honest, I always feel those who think I would be a good admin haven't really looked into my contribs. I have a terrible lack of experience in many areas, and have made a lot of dumb mistakes.

I'll tell you what, if you really think I'd be good, check into my contribs a bit and be frank about what you see and my chances of passing an RfA.

Oh, plus there are the RfA questions at the beginning which are really hard. Everyone answers really intelligently, and I would answer like a 12-year-old -- straightforward, but overly simplistic. I think that would blow it for me.

I could see the results be something like:

Oppose Total dunce. User:Bob
Oppose per Bob
Oppose per Bob
Oppose Yep, dunce, per Bob
Oppose Huge dunce! User:Mary

etc. etc.

I wish there could be some sort of other system that didn't involve 5 days of hell. I mean everyone knows me, and knows that I would probably be an okay admin. I wish they could just !vote and that'd be it. The whole gauntlet thing is all a bit bloodlusty for me. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:35, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anna, I honestly cannot tell you if you would or would not pass at RfA. However, I do know that I would love to nominate you and I'm hardly alone (which is a good indicator). You are a quality contributor and there is no question in my mind that you can be trusted with the tools, which is the most important concern. Frankly, if the RfA process is ever to be revived and rescued, who better to start the revival than a beloved contributor like you? AutomaticStrikeout ? 02:59, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :) But my RfA would just be another RfA. If the process remains the same, then how could it be a revival? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:08, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It would not be a revival all by itself, but it could be a start. AutomaticStrikeout ? 03:20, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Anna, I've collaborated with you directly and I suspect you would have so much "beat the nominator" support that your RfA would produce edit conflicts for the first several hours. Sure, you could probably benefit from some admin coaching, but you are a genuine article when it comes to what the doctor ordered to move this project forward. You should look at how you rate when a computer script looks at your contributions. Even it finds you very impressive, and it was developed based on the collaborative input of many RfA regulars, including me, using a mean average of the criteria we asserted to use in weighing a candidates eligibility. I strongly suspect if I take this extensive look at your contributions that you think I have not, I will end up in agreement with the script. No one will admit it, but I guarantee you there are some who base their !vote on the script alone. I never have, but I always run the candidates name. My76Strat (talk) 03:12, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Like AutomaticStrikeout ? 03:20, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmmm, well, I guess maybe it's a good plan. So could I trout you if I fail? :) And I don't mean a baby trout. I'm talking about a screen-filling, village-feeding, fighting-marlin-sized whopper of a fish. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:22, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, you can not fail! Only the process can fail, and at times it does; too often in truth. But yes, I'll endure catfish stingers if I'm wrong about this. My76Strat (talk) 03:34, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Anna Frodesiak. Before you accept the nomination and get it going, there might be a few (or more than a few) others out there who would be happy to co-nom. AutomaticStrikeout ? 03:55, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

However, you might want to answer the first three questions when you find a convenient time. AutomaticStrikeout ? 04:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was glad to see that come up on my watchlist, just make sure that you answer the questions before you transclude it (from past experience), I am sure you will do great. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 10:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anna. Both Bobrayner and I think that you would make a great admin, so that's two more people who won't be giving you "Oppose dunce" votes. :) Would you like a co-nomination? — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:01, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all. I've written to Moonriddengirl for feedback. Maybe she will write some nice feedback. After that, maybe she will co-nominate. I'm not sure how it all works, or about why more than one nominator is good. I don't follow RfA, and now I wish I did. Actually, I just found out that Legoktm became an admin.

I will look at those three questions tomorrow and answer them. Is that the right next step? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:12, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't worry about not having followed RfA, every RfA is different (although I don't follow it much myself). Just be yourself and I am sure everything will go swimmingly. Yes answer the three questions at your leisure, that would be the next step. If you have any questions I am happy to help. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 15:18, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Having one co-nominator seems to be the standard these days, and having two or even three is becoming increasingly fashionable. More than three is out, though - it looks like you're trying too hard. Having just the nominator is a bit daring, but not as much as a self-nomination, which is positively scandalous. ;) Of course, in the end, it's only fashion, and it's what you've done on the project that people will judge you on, not whether you've followed the nom du jour. You'll be fine. And yes, what Kelapstick said - the next step is to answer the questions at your own pace. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 15:59, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate everything you're all trying to do, but all this nominator business seems rather like endorsing a candidate for public office. I don't like politics one bit, and am rather put off by the whole RfA thing at the moment. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:41, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to review some recent RFAs to see examples of questions answered, issues raised, and final outcomes, consider Wikipedia:Successful requests for adminship#2013 and Wikipedia:Unsuccessful adminship candidacies (Chronological)#2013. Take all the time you desire to ensure this is something you are comfortable with doing. --My76Strat (talk) 01:02, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Result

I declined, regretfully, and the page was deleted very shortly after. So, I will post here what I wrote because it included an explanation and thanks: I must respectfully decline the nomination. I would like a bit more time to think about how I would use the admin tools, and watch how admins work in those areas. Thank you very, very much for the support and votes of confidence.

I would like to run for RfA, but what I also really need is for someone who has lots of experience to spend the time to go through my edits and look for serious issues.

Thanks again to everyone, and sorry for all the fuss. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Images

I didn't want to pollute the article talk page. May I ask why the image request failed?--Canoe1967 (talk) 12:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A nice man said I could use images from the website, but I told him that those would be removed as copyvios. I asked if he could email me some, but he never did. That's pretty much it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:12, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I will try again and explain all the 'photographer must release under free licence through OTRS' stuff. I just created http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Canoe1967/Sculptors that should help us get more statue images. It seems many don't understand our copyright issues. Thanks for trying btw.--Canoe1967 (talk) 14:09, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was worth the try. Good work with the sculptors thing. I trust it will yield good results. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:12, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Amanda Todd - 01.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Amanda Todd - 01.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fiddle Faddle 15:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another new article...

Hi There! I just created a new article based on those pictures at the article request area, well as you already know I started creating some of those pages, and I made another one. If you are free, and have nothing to do you can visit the new page I just created Rhynchocinetes uritai, and so far it's okay, just needs some cleanup. Cheers! JackFrost2121(Frostbitten?/ My Work) 00:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well done, again! It looks great. Those have been sitting there for ages, so it's fantastic that you've come along and made them into articles. I will repopulate the table soon.

Look at a few other species articles to see how to enter the last few lines of the taxobox. What's missing is the species binomial and authority.

Have you heard of WP:DYK? It's right up your alley. You can get your article talked about on the Main Page, which gets 10 million page visits a day.

Keep up the good work. You are exactly what everyone wants to see in a new editor. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:01, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]