User talk:Lyricmac

Vandalism count

This page has been vandalised 5 times (so far).

Avalos

Que yo sepa nunca se absorbió oficialmente, al igual que Ranchería Juarez o Nombre de Dios, pero ya todo mundo le llama colonia, así que de facto ya es parte de la ciudad, saludos Lefairh (talk) 16:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sello Mexicano de Lola la Grande.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:09, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PTRP

Sorry to show my ignorance, but what is PTRP? I have never heard of it. You got this (kind of discharge?) in AIT? What was your MOS going to be? Sorry for the curiosity attack.--Lyricmac (talk) 22:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.amsara.amedd.army.mil/reports/2000/FORTJACKSON.htm

Hope this information helps explain what PTRP is and what the purpose is. -Signaleer (talk) 15:30, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pope John Paul II

Hello Lyricmac, We are looking for help on the Pope John Paul II article in order to improve it and raise it to ‘Good Article’ and eventually ‘Featured Article’ status. So, I though I would invite you to take a look. Any help would be much appreciated. Kind Regards Marek.69 ^talk 02:19, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Allothereua maculata

I noticed your addition of Category:Biological pest control agents to the above article. While I don't doubt that it could belong in that category, there should generally be some indication in the article to explain why each category is warranted. The article doesn't mention any use in pest control, nor do the references, and none of the (scant) incoming links gives any explanation. Do you have a source for the assertion? I have removed the category for now, but I'd be more than happy to see it return when the reasons for its inclusion are clear. --Stemonitis (talk) 18:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stemonitis, please see your talk page.--Lyricmac (talk) 16:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The link you gave doesn't really seem to justify the category. Biological pest control is rather more than merely being beneficial, and the link doesn't even state that explicitly. In the absence of any other evidence, I don't think we can really justify the category. But thanks for trying, and for seeking out the link. --Stemonitis (talk) 08:12, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hidalgo

Sorry about that. Many IPs have recently benn changing things so i just assumed it was plain vandalism World (talk • contributions) 19:26, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have turned the article over to WP:Mexico, but they have done little for it. I plan on fixing it up myself when I find the time World (talk • contributions) 19:19, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:STP-ELP20.jpg

File:STP-ELP20.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Cathedral Parish of St Pat, El Paso.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Cathedral Parish of St Pat, El Paso.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 19:55, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 19:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP12.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP12.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:04, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP1.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP1.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP11.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP11.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:17, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP13.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP13.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:20, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP2.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP2.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP5.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP5.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:24, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP6.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP6.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:29, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP7.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP7.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP8.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP8.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP19.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP19.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:37, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP22.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP22.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP3.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP3.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP4.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP4.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:50, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP9.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP9.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:53, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP10.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP10.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:56, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP14.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP14.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP15.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP15.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:01, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP16.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP16.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:04, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP17.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP17.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:06, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP18.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP18.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:07, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:STP-ELP21.jpg is now available as Commons:File:STP-ELP21.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:08, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sello Mexicano de Lola la Grande.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sello Mexicano de Lola la Grande.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 16:54, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have been through this before with this stamp; frankly I am getting just a bit tired of all of this.

Let me reiterate what was said the last time this topic came up: The stamp is mentioned in the body of the article as it was a signal honour for Beltran to be recognised by her government as one of the singular figures in the history of popular Mexican music; sans stamp, the body of the article would possibly need to be re-written to exclude mention of same, since the reader might need the illustration of the stamp as a point of reference-years of teaching has taught me that not all of us visualise in quite the same way. However, that is simply the opinion of an old and (probably) obsolete teacher. I do not wish to seem petulant, however this is not the first time I have had to defend my uploading of this image, and I have more pressing matters that need my attention.

I herewith wash my hands of this matter; do as you wish.--Lyricmac (talk) 17:21, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paraninfo1.jpg

Hi! I just let you know that I nominated the file Paraninfo1.jpg, originally uploaded by you, for deletion due to a possible copyright problem. You can discuss the issue here. Best regards, --Apalsola ^{t • c} 08:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Murals_in_Mexico)--"the photographical reproduction of this work is covered under the article 148 of the Mexican copyright law, which states that «Literary and artistic works already published may be used, provided that normal commercialization of the work is not affected, without auhorization from the copyrightholder and without remuneration, invariably citing the source and without altering the work, only in the following cases […] VII. Reproduction, communication, and distribution by means of drawings, paintings, photographs, and audiovisual means of works visible from public places".--Lyricmac (talk) 16:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out and sorry about the inconvinience. I have to be more careful next time I nominate images for deletion. Best regards, --Apalsola ^{t • c} 20:57, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To our newest Rollbacker

I have just granted you rollback rights because I believe you to be trustworthy, and because you have a history of reverting vandalism and have given in the past or are trusted in the future to give appropriate warnings. Please have a read over WP:ROLLBACK and remember that rollback is only for use against obvious vandalism. Please use it that way (it can be taken away by any admin at a moment's notice). You may want to consider adding {{Rollback}} and {{User rollback}} to your userpage. Any questions, please drop me a line. Best of luck and thanks for volunteering! wadester 16 23:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aurelio Major

Kindly do not remove the section. It is being used with express permission. It is factually correct and verifiable. If in doubt you may send me an email. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quislibet (talk • contribs) 18:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Irish Brigade.jpg

Hi, on 10 July you marked File:Irish Brigade.jpg as having been uploaded to commons, however I can't find it there and you don't seem to have uploaded anything to commons on that day so could you help point me in the direction of the picture? Thanks, Nev1 (talk) 01:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sorting that out. I was deleting a few files that had been transferred to commons when I came across that one. Nev1 (talk) 07:32, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Teesta

Don't revert anymore if you don't want an uninformed admin blocking you. I have referred the IP troll to the edit war noticeboard, and have requested them not to block you, since you were reverting vandalism. For now, please attempt to discuss on the talk page, and add your comment to that report.Pectore^talk 18:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies-I was seeing what seemed a problem of POV in the edits, hence the reverts.--Lyricmac (talk) 19:02, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You weren't doing anything wrong by any means, but someone judging this out of context may get the impression you have. Just a friendly note.Pectore^talk 22:50, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Guadelupe

I have inserted sources into the section I edited.Hope that clears it up.·Maunus·ƛ· 18:06, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reversion

Hello, you reverted an edit here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Antarctic_cod&diff=307491445&oldid=307491222

could you explain why? I looked at the talk page but I see no mention of it there.

Answered on User talk:71.49.78.167.

I would ask that you not make such reverts without discussion in the future. I think that reversion without discussion creates a bad atmosphere, and discourages contribution. As you now seem to notice, the matter is a bit complex. Currently the article is not formatted properly in comparison to other articles. Whatever the title of the article, the first words in bold are the name of that article, correct?

In any event, this was by no means a clear-cut call, and reversion w/o explanation was the wrong tool for the job.

I don't agree with your rationale at all, and I think that the wording of the article(the second paragraph, specifically) makes clear that your original edit had been ill advised, considering that you exchanged the correct designation for an incorrect one-that the article was also misnamed is to the point as well. My revert was made in good faith-I would suggest that you accept that fact and proceed from there. This is my final word on the subject. Wishing you the best of the day,--Lyricmac (talk) 06:16, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Diocese article

You want the misspelled article deleted? John Carter (talk) 23:49, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That would be best, since you had moved the narrative over to Roman Catholic Diocese of Ciudad Juárez. The mis-spelled article is rather superfluous now, I guess. Thanks a bunch.--Lyricmac (talk) 13:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Grito de Dolores

Lyricmac, you put some rather strange refs in your edit to Grito de Dolores, with ^ a b c d e f g ... in them, I think that I cleaned it up, can you look at the article to see what you think? Thanks, — sligocki (talk) 03:20, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article looks fine to me-the edits that you deemed a little strange were taken verbatum by me from the article Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla to flesh-out the Grito article; frankly, I don't know why the alphabet soup was included in the notes from the Hidalgo piece. Its certainly less wordy, and thats normally better. If you have no objection, I will put the Hidalgo quote back in bold-that was, I believe, the original format in the Meyer text, and thats the authoritative reference on this event, and theres really no need for the Hidalgo tag at the end of the quote, since it is clearly understood that Hidalgo is the one who was speaking. Anyway, good job on the references(notes).--Lyricmac (talk) 03:35, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Need to see Alania page

Made some additions according some old USSR scholars and a book published by Unesco. Currently some people reverting it without reliable reason. Nakh 14:11, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First want to thank for your precious help and advice. I read arbitration page. They ask first try to solve problem by your own. I will try to discuss first. Than I will maybe ask you with making arbitration request. Thank you! Nakh 04:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:17Dic06 Isaac, Caro y Joel.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:17Dic06 Isaac, Caro y Joel.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:51, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Answered on discussion page.--Lyricmac (talk) 07:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You deserve it: A barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You richly deserve a pat on the back for monitoring and mopping up the mess over at Pfafftown, North Carolina. Sophus Bie ^(talk) 07:26, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Wikipedians who are recipients of the Commendation Medal

I have nominated Category:Wikipedians who are recipients of the Commendation Medal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:16, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Answered on discussion page.--Lyricmac (talk) 18:02, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Permissions question

Hi. How might I contact you directly with a question about using one of your beautiful photos? I don't see an email address anywhere.

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chillwiki (talk • contribs) 00:33, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Tiptoety ^talk 09:46, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grito de Dolores

If it hasn't already been tried, it is always possible to add some hidden text to an article which would only appear when someone tries to edit the article. In this case, maybe a hidden comment to the effect that, while linguistically the only translation might be preferable, the word dolores in this case is being used to refer to the location Dolores, not the Spanish word. That would probably be the preferable approach. If that doesn't work, then some form of protection might be a realistic option. John Carter (talk) 19:43, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

San Juan de los Lagos

Drop me an e-mail by using the function in the Toolbox section on the side if you wish, I came up with about 20 or 30 articles from various data banks relating to the topic which might be useful. John Carter (talk) 16:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Spiritus Christi community (Rochester, NY)

The article Spiritus Christi community (Rochester, NY) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lack of secondary sources and other problems dating back to 2007.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Will Beback talk 11:00, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

We could use your help in Talk:List_of_people_excommunicated_by_the_Roman_Catholic_Church#Nazis_excommunicated where a document is being discussed with which you may be familiar. Student7 (talk) 14:05, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not as sure as I once was. But as I understand it, the document tends to be more generic than specific. It seems to me, one thing to excommunicate, say Goebbels, and quite another to say, "anyone in high places who really persists in this stuff." My impression is that it is vague and more of a warning rather than refusing specific people sacraments. But I could be wrong. The Nazis did not seem to respond to this. That seems more indicative of its effectiveness. The dog that did not bark in the night! :) Whereas a (later) smuggled pastoral note from the Pope that was read in German parishes got a third of the priests rounded up and sent to concentration camps. That was real and well-understood! So I don't know, :) Student7 (talk) 11:46, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-Free rationale for File:Javier2.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Javier2.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under Non-Free content criteria but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a Non-Free rationale.

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:30, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Situation remedied on 25 June 2011.--Lyricmac (talk) 03:07, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hola!

I found you while looking at photos and using one a mural of Pancho Villa in Chihuahua. Have you heard of Wikimedia México? We are a group of Wikipedians/Wikimedians organized to improve the encyclopedia as it relates to Mexico (languages and subjects). You can see our site at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_M%C3%A9xico and/or you can contact me. Im rather heavily involved.Thelmadatter (talk) 03:00, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Completely new abortion proposal and mediation

In light of the seemingly endless disputes over their respective titles, a neutral mediator has crafted a proposal to rename the two major abortion articles (pro-life/anti-abortion movement, and pro-choice/abortion rights movement) to completely new names. The idea, which is located here, is currently open for opinions. As you have been a contributor in the past to at least one of the articles, your thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.

The hope is that, if a consensus can be reached on the article titles, the energy that has been spent debating the titles of the articles here and here can be better spent giving both articles some much needed improvement to their content. Please take some time to read the proposal and weigh in on the matter. Even if your opinion is simple indifference, that opinion would be valuable to have posted.

To avoid concerns that this notice might violate WP:CANVASS, this posting is being made to every non-anon editor who has edited either page (or either page's respective talk page) since 1 July 2010, irrespective of possible previous participation at the mediation page. HuskyHuskie (talk) 20:49, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Opposition to the legalisation of abortion". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by November 20, 2011.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 01:48, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Opposition to the legalisation of abortion, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, AGK [•] 21:33, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

File source problem with File:Budapest Symphony Orchestra.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Budapest Symphony Orchestra.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, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Peleliu

I reverted your edit at the above because it had the effect of re-inputting vandalism. Denisarona (talk) 19:46, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'm not as fast as I was 40 years ago.--Lyricmac (talk) 19:52, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't claim to be much younger - I remember typewriters and doing maths without calculators!! Denisarona (talk) 19:59, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla

Lyricmac,

Article: Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla.

I've come to you since I noticed you've done some editing on the above article. At the moment, Reference number 5 is invalid. Would you be able to fix this error? It would be appreciated if it was fixed by someone who has worked on the article and who seems to be reliable to do so. Once again it would be appreciated and I'll see if "us" Coordinators can assess our WikiProject Military History of this article. Adamdaley (talk) 06:11, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

José Alfredo Jiménez image

Lyricmac, I need to clarify your license for making the photo of José Alfredo Jiménez available (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f4/Jose_Alfredo_12JAMB.jpg). Do you hold the rights to this photo, or do you merely possess an original photo? Who is the photographer? To be honest, it actually looks like a scan of the album cover (printing dots are in the scan) and I want to confirm before I use the photo under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License. Although the image is still in the Commons, I see that it is not in your gallery, so I'm curious. Also, how would you like the photo to be credited, just to Lyricmac, or some other name? Please advise. Thanks. --HerrWatt — Preceding unsigned comment added by HerrWatt (talk • contribs) 16:46, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Lyricmac. You have new messages at Magog the Ogre's talk page.
Message added 06:11, 19 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:11, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ichthus: January 2012

ICHTHUS

January 2012

In this issue...

Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Wikipedia • It is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions contact the Newsroom • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here

Notification of automated file description generation

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

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:48, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another one of your uploads, File:ChihPalFed1.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:30, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another one of your uploads, File:ChihHidalgo1.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:32, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Javier2.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Javier2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:05, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	thanks Ioasis365 (talk) 14:30, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]