I'm pretty mortified by what I've seen here, and totally understand your frustration. Take a break, come back tomorrow, and leave messages in the discussions about your files you feel should be kept. I'm doing four different things right now, but will try to look into this and help you out as time allows. AniMate06:08, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, so you know, there are better ways to deal with a user your having problems with other than going to other users and complaining. If you come back, consider going to Wikipedia:Administrators noticeboard/Incidents. That way incidents like this can be examined and discussed by independent, neutral administrators rather than users your friends with and those that watch their talk pages. AniMate06:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to see you back editing, and hopefully feeling a little better. As you are no doubt aware User:Angusmclellan has closed a number of these disruptive nominations and the pictures should be restored to the articles. If you encounter any more problems, let me know. AniMate01:29, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
About Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 February 5
Hello. I have closed some of the nominations at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 February 5 which I thought were patently incorrect. As I didn't understand what was going on I had commented at a couple before, so I won't close those. If there are any you would want to be deleted, you can add {{db-userreq}} to them and someone will do. If there are any you want kept that are still open and nobody has commented, can you let me know on my talk page? I think there are quite a few would be useful on Wikimedia Commons. Very best regards, Angus McLellan(Talk)20:56, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Daniel, I'm trying to go through some of the deletion noms. It's good to see that other editors have also taken an itnerest and established the encyclopedic quality of many of the images. I don't know a great deal about electronic so I may need help. What is the central channel image [1] about?
I do think we can get rid of some of the out of focus and poorly lit images. But there are lots of good ones. I'm sorry to see so little collegial discussion before you were hit with this deletion onslaught. Please let me know if I can be of any help. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:45, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So it's a homemade assemblage of center channel speakers? I see Binkenstreet objects to it as crude. I'm not sure. Would a caption explaining what's going on in the photo help? ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:45, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I voted on some of the images. I think those that are in fact orphaned would be good to put up at Commons so that all the Wikipedias of various languages can access them and they can be categorized. Do you ever upload directly there?
How are things otherwise? Are you going to watch the Superbowl. I see there's snow on the Eastern Seaboard, how's the weather up there? It's raining here. :( ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've also commented on a handful. I don't know what's going on here - did Fastily have some sort of personal quarrel with you or something? He seems to have been on a spree of unreasonable deletion nominations. If it will help, let me assure you that the majority of Wikipedia admins, and even common editors, are not like this. Thanks for your contributions, some are quite good, and they are appreciated. --GRuban (talk) 22:46, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for uploading File:Mast_1-1.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
Hi, Daniel. I noticed that you asked on Fastily's talk page whether a Flickr e-mail from the owner of a photograph is sufficient to show that the person has consented to licensing the image to Wikipedia.
For other images such as those you see on websites, you have to e-mail the copyright owner and ask him if he agrees to license the image to Wikipedia under a free licence such as CC-BY-3.0. CC-BY-SA-3.0 or the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). I usually send out a standard e-mail like this:
Dear Sirs/Mesdames,
I am one of the many volunteer editors of Wikipedia. I would very much like to use the image at [source of the image, e.g., the URL of a website] in the article "[Name of article]" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_name). In order to do so legally, I need to find out who the copyright owner of the image is and to obtain that person's permission to license the image for use on Wikipedia and its sister projects under a free licence such as the GNU Free Documentation License (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License). Other acceptable free licences are the Creative Commons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons) Attribution (CC-BY) and Attribution-ShareAlike (CC-BY-SA) licences. (Click on the links for more information about those licences.)
I would therefore be grateful if you would let me know who the copyright owner of the image is, and whether that person, or someone on his or her behalf, is agreeable to licensing the image to Wikipedia. Do note that by agreeing to license the image, you are agreeing to the conditions set out at the end of this e-mail.
I look forward to hearing from you on the matter.
Regards,
[Your name]
* * *
I hereby assert on behalf of the copyright owner, which I am authorized by the copyright owner to do, that the copyright owner is the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the work.
The copyright owner agrees to publish that work under the GNU Free Documentation Licence and the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-3.0) (or Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike (CC-BY-SA-3.0)) licence [please amend if necessary, otherwise both licences will apply].
The copyright owner acknowledges that it grants anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs.
The copyright owner is aware that it always retains copyright of its work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to the copyright owner.
The copyright owner is aware that the free licence only concerns copyright, and reserves the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc.
The copyright owner acknowledges that it cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the image may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.
If the copyright owner or someone on his behalf agrees to license the image to Wikipedia under a free licence, he should reply to your e-mail. You should then send a copy of the e-mail conversation to permissions-en@wikimedia.org (if you plan to upload the image to the English Wikipedia) or permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (for the Wikimedia Commons) so that it can be verified using the Open-source Ticket Request System (OTRS). In the meantime, you can upload the image and place an {{OTRS pending}} tag on it. An OTRS volunteer will verify the e-mail conversation, and if everything is in order the volunteer will insert the {{OTRS}} tag on the image description page. — Cheers, JackLee–talk–11:08, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I second what Jacklee said. Note that I deleted those files you uploaded from flickr per WP:CSD#F3 because the licensing of the file was "All rights Reserved". Please bear in mind that because a file is on flickr, that doesn't mean it's free (as a matter of fact, most images there are copyrighted). -FASTILY(TALK)19:15, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Yes, I should have mentioned that sometimes people upload images that do not belong to them on to Flickr and then license it under a free licence (this is sometimes called "Flickrwashing"). Use some discretion – if you see a high-quality image of a celebrity, chances are it was illegally ripped from a website. Whenever you are in doubt, leave the uploader a message asking him or her to confirm that he or she is the copyright owner. If there's no confirmation, don't transfer the image to the Commons. — Cheers, JackLee–talk–19:28, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This article is again deleted ! i dont know why they had a problem with this article, someone has deleted this article on the basis of the previous disscussion for deletion.
Thanks for uploading File:Wikipedia Flickr photo permission.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 website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. 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 per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:57, 6 February 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 16:57, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You can't, per WP:NFCC #9. The use of air use images outside of the main article namespace is not permitted. I've reverted your re-addition of this content to your userpage, and turned the bot back on. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Daniel! I noticed that many of your uploads was nominated for deletion. Perhaps they are not of usen in English Wikipedia but I think that many of them would be nice on Commons. So perhaps you would concider to upload to Commons instead? --MGA73 (talk) 10:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Daniel Christensen. You have new messages at MGA73's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Don't know but the show is certainly copyrighted and so the image is a derivative work; part of the copyright is owned by whomever owns the program. Better to have a shot of the TV with no image displayed - Peripitus(Talk)06:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately what he's got to do is either change the licence on flickr or send an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org stating which licence the image should be her under. If you have such an email you can simply forward it. - Peripitus(Talk)02:10, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Daniel Christensen. You have new messages at Astronaut's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Since this is stated to be a promotional image, and since the original Flickr user doesn't make clear why (and how) they have the right to license a promotional image under CC terms, it is very unlikely that this is legitimately CC licensed.
I've added a fair-use rationale so that it can remain in the article, and altered the licensing to fair use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
Fastily, I sure hope you're NOT going on another one of your distruptive deletion rampages, like you did before with Daniel's pictures. Because if you are, I'm taking it to ANI. I'm warning you now. Cadencool03:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is hardly what I would call a deletion rampage. As far as Wikipedia image policy are concerned, this is a completely proper tag. Daniel has amended the concern by adding a license tag, which the deletion tag reminded him to do. So that being said Caden, why don't back off before I report you to ANI for harassment. Good day. -FASTILYsock(TALK)07:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File copyright problem with File:10.2_surround_sound_speaker_configuration.jpg
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
Hey Daniel, i was just reviewing a new article you created called Valu Home Centers. Just be careful that you don't write articles in a advertising tone. Have a look at WP:PROMO on ways to write an article on a business or company. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me on my talk page. Matt Ballard (talk) 08:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Allis Chalmers Energy, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews/articleid/3515745. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 04:40, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated John Deere DB120, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Deere DB120. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
I noticed that the articles on your User page which are located in your user space contain article categories. That puts your User space into the article category. Articles in user space should not contain article space categories. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 02:49, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To prevent the categories from appearing, put a colon before the word "Category", so instead of [[Category:Foo]], type [[:Category:Foo]]. Mjroots (talk) 20:51, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I'm aware of those now. I did that a long time ago if you'll look you'll notice all the more recent ones don't have categories, sorry about that! Daniel Christensen (talk) 21:58, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
When you say with no acction required, what's an example of a potential action? Would it be like deleting all the subpages with a bot or something? That wouldn't be that bad. Daniel Christensen (talk) 12:52, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I meant administrative action. This could mean anything from deletion of some of your subpages to blocking you. I'm sure the latter won't be necessary. Not sure about a bot deletion, sledgehammer to crack a nut sort of thing IMHO. Please sort out the cat problem so we can close the thread. Mjroots (talk) 18:52, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:The Finger Lakes Wiki main page.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Please stop re-adding non-free files to your userpage, such as File:The Finger Lakes Wiki main page.jpg. Such files are not permitted to be displayed on any page outside of the main article namespace, per our policy at WP:NFCC #9. I've reverted your shutdown of the bot, as it acted correctly, and once again removed the image from your userpage. Please do not reinstate it. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 16:18, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Did not work there - bought from there and watched the bogus efforts abound under false pretense. You can see the history of my liquidations like CM and eToys throughout the Web. Amazing at how so few minor characters were able to put the stock market into a tumble.
Thanks for uploading File:Cybex.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thanks for uploading File:The Finger Lakes Wiki main page.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk03:59, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Seduisant (talk) 15:06, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on File:Sill plate.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 19:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on File:Allis-Chalmers Model G tractor.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. [2], and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:
state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 19:27, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on File:Duquesne brewing clock pittsburgh.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. [3], and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:
state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 19:29, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on File:Back of Colortrak 2000 Dimenisa compatible TV.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. [4], and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:
state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 19:30, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on File:The Duff River; County Sligo, Ireland Kayaking.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. [5], and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:
state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 19:31, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They aren't exactly the same - look closely at the apostrophes. That's what's doing it...caught me by surprise once before, too. I'd copy the text from the first article to the second one and make the first a redirect - the second apostrophe is in line with what's used on other articles here.
Hi Daniel Christensen! Please explain your edits to List of tallest structures in Israel and related articles. I am quite confused by the undiscussed article move, especially since it was done the wrong way (you need to ask an administrator if you can't move an article, not copy and paste). Thanks, Ynhockey(Talk)20:56, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Almost every other building list is called list of tallest buildings in... I've never seen an article listing only buildings first, then only having a small table at the bottom, list one place with four smokestacks, and being named as list of tallest structures in, not even buildings and structures in. Daniel Christensen (talk) 21:07, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In that case I'm going to revert your edits and them move the article properly. I cannot stress enough the importance of proper article moves, and if you can't do it because of technical limitations, please ask an administrator at WP:RM. Cheers, Ynhockey(Talk)18:57, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Daniel Christensen! I am not sure which fact you are referring to. I have fixed one of the possible issues, about the completion year, but in general Emporis data is more reliable per WP:RS than data from websites like skyscraperpage. —Ynhockey(Talk)09:03, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on The Tale of the Faithful Dove requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. 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 {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:02, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Daniel, justletting you know that ItsLassieTime was/is a vast multiplicity of dozens of sock accounts such that were being used even after the investigations had begun, to create and !vote for DYK, FA, and GA among their other dozens of articles that are blatant plagiarisms (I caught a few of them myself). Very often, in view of the thousands of edits they made, the only solution is to radically delete or revert all the edits they ever made, including any pages they created. Obviously there's going to be some collateral damage, but it will be far less than the danger of Wikipedia getting sued for a plagiarism or copyvio we missed. We can allow no margin of tolerance whatsoever for copyright violations of images or text.
Your Finger Lakes Wiki uses a map of the Finger Lakes that was created by me, but you do not follow the terms of the Creative Commons licenses under which the file is released. I request that you either remove the file from the Finger Lakes Wiki or provide proper attribution per the license terms. PowersT15:24, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
You recently removed a tag for citations on an article you created. Generally, the author should not remove any maintenance tags. If you would like them removed, post something on the talk page of the article. Or better yet, post something on the talk page of the user who tagged the article. Thank you. Bped1985 (talk) 04:37, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A search for references found four published (gBooks) minor mentions for "Mega Sound" (Megasound is less productive) with "Warner Bros". Other then it exists no support for the content of this article is found. Fails WP:N and WP:V
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.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Miami stuff 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 {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Chzz ► 06:35, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your user subpage at User:Daniel Christensen/The War On Wikipediamay not be appropriate to be indexed by external search engines as presently written. Typically, this could be because it appears promotional, or contains material in development or archived that doesn't yet meet policies and guidelines. I have tagged this page as "noindex", which allows editing but minimizes the page's inclusion in search engine results.
If you believe that your userpage does not violate our guidelines, please leave a note here and we can discuss it. As an alternative, you may add {{db-userreq}} to the top of the page in question and an administrator will delete it, you can change the page so that it more clearly meets Wikipedia guidelines, or you can edit it as normal and ignore the tag completely (it will not affect editing).
Thanks for uploading File:Pro landing images ProLogicIIz.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles05:43, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia isn't MySpace or a free web host. I nuked your draft advert. I can email the contents if you like, ask on my talk page. Guy (Help!) 11:04, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy deletion of "User:Daniel Christensen/sub-pages/info and fax"
You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.
Thank you.
A tag has been placed on Canyon Ranch Miami Beach, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.
If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Canyon Ranch Miami Beach and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Corvus cornixtalk00:41, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Canyon Ranch Miami Beach, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 01:40, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Canyon Ranch Miami Beach. Please use the {{hangon}} template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's talk page. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 03:24, 5 March 2011 (U
Please do notpersonally attack editors as you have done at List of tallest buildings in Miami, comment on content, no contributors. Once you contribute an article you make it available for other editors to collaborate and edit the article, personally attacking other editors is not helpful to the collaborative environment we are meant to maintain. Rehevkor✉16:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your understanding. While I'm here though, and on the subject of userrights, I noticed that your account does not have reviewer nor rollback rights. Would you be interested in having one or both of them? (They're not autopatrolled, but they're userrights that you may still find useful. Reviewer will help you with articles that have flagged protection on them, and rollback will allow you to revert vandalism more easily.) Acalamari20:55, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Flipped both userrights on for you. Remember in the case of rollback that its use is for vandal-reverting: using it to revert non-vandal edits (such as using it revert-war, or reverting edits you disagree with) can lead to it being revoked...and some admins don't even give editors any warning in advance before removing the tool in such cases. Wikipedia:New admin school/Deleting/delete is the page to go to if you'd like to test the tool to before using it in the mainspace. Have fun! Acalamari21:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The picture part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Miami/Header is actually not really that complicated. The reason that your picture does not come out right when you put it in there is that the picture needs to be much longer widthwise to look right in the banner. You can see that with the picture that I decided to use instead.--Jorfer (talk) 13:56, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just mean wider in pixels. The old picture usage was bad I agree. If you have the original image than upload it and try it. If it does not work, message me again.--Jorfer (talk) 15:42, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why it looks blurry is because Wikimedia is reducing so many pixels into so few and many of the pixels in that image are just camera noise (random red and blue dots). I don't blame you, because it is almost impossible to get a good non-flash night shot without some of the most expensive cameras on the market. I have a $100 camera myself, but I realize its limitations.--Jorfer (talk) 23:52, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In March, you were the reviewer in Getty Villa where you came in on the heels of another, questionable review. The prior reviewer has now done an individual reassessment in Talk:Getty Villa/GA4 reversing your passing it as GA. His arguments are that the article has been carefully phrased to avoid copying the language of the sources, but as a result, the language is not as straight forward. He also claims that because the contents of the article is similar to the items discussed on the museum's website, that it must have a pro-museum bias and fails NPOV. I believe that you were correct in passing the article, and have left a brief note at the end of the reassessment. If you could also weigh in, I would appreciate it. For your information, in the last few days, he has also added a comment at the end of your review in Talk:Getty Villa/GA3 questioning whether you had actually applied the GA criteria to the article. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 23:05, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As the hidden comments in the article, and the numerous discussions on the talk page, all indicate, the IMDB Top 250 list is not to be added to The Shawshank Redemption article. Thank you. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive17:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well then it's no wonder the article sucks. Look at the giant tag that's been on it so long. It's worse than any major motion picture article I've seen. Daniel Christensen (talk) 17:56, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Kingdom Tower, Jeddah, render.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Kingdom Tower (Jeddah) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. RyanVeseyReview me!23:40, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Daniel Christensen. You have new messages at Astronaut's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I can, but so can you. :) When an article's history consists solely of the edit making it a redirect, a non-admin can move the article it's redirected to over on top of it. I'll do this one. --Golbez (talk) 14:13, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, whoops, I misread - I was looking at the redir for 'Kingdom tower', not 'Kingdom Tower'. Hm. Doesn't look to me like any GFDL issues, since the previous edits were bout the wrong building. --Golbez (talk) 14:17, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Daniel, frankly some of the comments you made are offensive and counterproductive. Especially your comment [6] is uncalled for. Please consider this a warning for incivility. But besides that, I've been involved in a couple of reviews, and talking back to a reviewer in the way in which you did is a really, really bad idea--it's counterproductive. If you'll take some advice, strike those comments and apologize for them, and don't lose your patience, especially not with someone who is spending a considerable amount of time reviewing and helping improve your work. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 00:35, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I probably stepped a little out of line going to ANI so fast and I apologize. I should have addressed some of the issues on your talk page. Your contributions to Kingdom Tower are valued and I hope you will put this behind you.RyanVeseyReview me!02:07, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Replaceable fair use File:Mile-High Tower comparison diagram.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Mile-High Tower comparison diagram.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 00:26, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just noting that I have placed your recent FAR nomination on hold to allow a bit longer for the talk-page discussion to proceed. If in a week or two your concerns have not been addressed, ping me and I'll reopen it. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all the work you did in making Kingdom Tower a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated.
In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell(talk)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emerson AV301 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 06:34, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Daniel Christensen (talk) 14:28, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. You have a new message at Skier Dude's talk page.
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Aventura (disambiguation) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Aventura. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen.
![[1]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Center_channel.jpg){kind=link}
Hey there Daniel Christensen, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free files are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some files that I found on User:Daniel Christensen. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use images to your user-space drafts or your talk page.
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your user subpage at User:Daniel Christensen/The War On Wikipedia may not be appropriate to be indexed by external search engines as presently written. Typically, this could be because it appears promotional, or contains material in development or archived that doesn't yet meet policies and guidelines. I have tagged this page as "noindex", which allows editing but minimizes the page's inclusion in search engine results.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Ryan Vesey Review me! 23:40, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at Skier Dude's talk page.