User talk:MZMcBride/Archive 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Would like your opinion as an administrator

Does the sentence jusy below in the Asbestos article violate Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View (NPOV) policy?

Arguably the most notorious environmental polluter in history, W.R. Grace (A Civil Action), again showed its malice for human health with its failure to make public an internal study conducted by W.R. Grace, subsequent to its purchase of the Libby, MT Asbestos Mine in 1963.

What do you think? - mbeychok 01:37, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Deleting templates without checking where they are used.

You deleted this template - and didn't check whether it was still in use or not - I find that sloppy admin work. I cleaned up after you - and realize I should have deleted it a while ago once the decision to change the format reached consensus - but that doesn't change the fact that your actions made a featured list have read links to a template that didn't exist and if I hadn't needed to check a fact today - who knows how long this would have gone on before someone who knew how to fix it would fix it. Please at least check to make sure what appears to be a blank template is no longer in use rather than deleting it and if you had checked the history you would have seen I was the only one who edited that template and could easily have asked me by email. --Trödel 03:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I acknowledged my culpability above - the template was blanked but not deleted because it was unclear whether the new format would reach consensus - in which case the template would be needed again. --Trödel 16:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Regardless, thx for your cleanup efforts - I know from experience they are often thankless. --Trödel 16:34, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Me

Hi. I'm not allowed to delete my own talk pages? How old do they have to be? I hate the idea of keeping around an archive of trivial talk pages. But is that a req?-BillDeanCarter 13:41, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Award of a Barnstar

Barnstar of Diligence.png The Barnstar of Diligence
The Barnstar of Diligence is hereby awarded in recognition of extraordinary scrutiny, precision, and community service.

Awarded by Addhoc 15:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Reverting for no reason

Regarding [1]: Do you have any actual objection to this edit? Is it anything other than a relatively minor edit? Don't just blindly revert on a bogus point of what you think is procedure. —Centrxtalk • 17:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

The objection on the talk page is about an unrelated edit made by someone else. —Centrxtalk • 01:14, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Gallente

These pages are considered Cruft and not notable for Wikipedia? After seeing the history of Star Wars and Wookieepedia articles your deletion doesn't surprise me. The problem is CCP doesn't have an official Wiki for EVE Online and the best wiki I can find Eve-Wiki is being opposed by entrenched interests even though external wiki's of this sort are on 48 of 148 MMORPG articles and many featured gaming articles like Halo 2. Any help in resolving this matter would be appreciated. EVE Online is in the top 10 most popular MMORPG's with typically 25,000 people logged in at most times of the day. Alatari 20:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Enough

I've been called an idiot enough for trying to call attention to serious problems with this article, please save your sarcasm and insults for people who care and don't mistake me for one. KP Botany 20:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

Thanks for making the requested addition. There is one slight change that needs to be made per this comment, which makes good sense. Please make it also. -- Fyslee/talk 01:02, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

i want to focus ur attention on the wiki page titled india...

why i am telling this to you is that i m not understanding how to edit that page...
in the politics section there is a picture given stating that it is the secratariat building
but i want to make it clear that the building shown there is the supreme court of india...


hoping that u will make the necessary changes after ur research,

binoop007@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.88.78.43 (talk) 19:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)


"Inappropriate"

I left off the edit request box. As far as the domestic violence box, as you likely can guess, is intended to be humorous. What you deem "inappropriate" is your opinion. If I am in violation of a Wikipedia rule, please let me know. RealBigFlipsbrain 23:06, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Please, restore the block!!

The moment you lifted the block on The Indian Institute of Planning and Management the edit warring resumed. It seems the problems arise due to a clear conflict of interest that User:Iipmalum has in his rather positive POV edits, and a negative POV bias by User:Ponytailsnipper. Neutral parties can't edit the article with these two users continually reverting to their preferred versions; they need a topic ban in my opinion. You lifted the block so some additional citations could be added to the article. This has been done. Please restore the block. -Amatulic 04:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that was quick. I noticed you restored the protection just as I was re-introducing some of Iipmalum's more useful contributions back in. Ah, well. I hope the editors now use the talk page. Unfortunately Iipmalum didn't engage the entire time the article was locked previously. -Amatulic 04:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 8, 2007

Well, I got myself in a hurry, it should actually read "Fears regarding peak oil ..."; bother lowercase letters, no quotes about the link. Oops, ➪HiDrNick! 04:48, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Film template

I appreciate the heads-up. Unfortunately, the problem that I'm encountering right now has to do with category populating, and therefore there's little I can do re testing this in the sandbox, AFAIK. Some of the categories written for in the script (specifically at the end) are not filling properly, and I'm not certain why. I don't think that I can do this anywhere else. I apologize, however, if I'm doing anything wrong. What would you advise? Girolamo Savonarola 00:24, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

PS - the template was not randomly unlocked - I specifically requested it, since we recently did major overhaul work. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Template:Film_.28edit.7Ctalk.7Chistory.7Clinks.7Cwatch.7Clogs.29. Girolamo Savonarola 00:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Template cleanup

Hello. It seems that at some point you used a bot to create a series of calendar templates for the years 2004-2025, with multiple years for every month. Would you have any objection to me deleting the templates beyond the year 2009? Here's my logic: the templates are currently non-transcluded, and essentially orphaned. They show up in the list of untranscluded templates and I've been working hard to try to clean out the Template namespace. Along the same lines that we don't have articles for far future events, I can't see any legitimate use of a template for April 2025. If you'd prefer that I archive them in some way before deleting them, I'd be happy to oblige, but I truly believe that they don't need to be in the Template namespace. Thoughts? Cheers. --MZMcBride 01:41, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I only created them so that when it came to 2025, we didn't have to make them. If you want to delete them, that's fine, because when they are needed, I suppose we can just simply restore them. I think anything after 2009 can be subject for deletion -- so long as they can be restored at a later point. --AllyUnion (talk) 08:39, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Screenshot 09 03 07.png)

Nuvola apps important blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Screenshot 09 03 07.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:31, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Northwich Victoria F.C.

Hey. I saw you made several edits on the articles talk page and was wandering if you could unprotect the article, as its no longer needed really. It was protected as player Jon McCarthy's nationality was being changed from English to Northern Irish, but now he's left the club. Mattythewhite 19:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Protection on {{CongBio}}

Can this be reduced to semi-protected? We've made some really big changes lately. There's been no evidence of vandalism. Was there debate here bouat protecting it in the first place? Semi-protected should be sufficient. Please?! —Markles 21:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

why have you deleted this page

I have been using this page (List of Disney characters: 03:48, 2 September 2007 MZMcBride (Talk | contribs) deleted "Template:LDSTemple headings" ‎ (csd g7) ) for months now as i routinely need to refer to Disney characters because of my work and it was the easiest place to get a complete list from.

Accesskey templates

I'm not entirely sure that the template:-space accesskeys have ever had an effect on the software. Back when the move was done, the accesskeys were stored in MediaWiki:Monobook.js (here's an example revision, which was history-moved to Common.js). I don't think anything in Template: space can make a difference to the software, unless it's transcluded in MediaWiki space. So my suggestion is to check the templates for transclusions, and if there aren't any, deleting them's probably safe. I don't know that for certain, though. (However, the settings seem at a glance to be at their default values, and if a server looks for a page it needs but it isn't there the default value is used instead, so even if they were relevant deleting them would likely be safe; I've speedied MediaWiki pages identical to the defaults as G6 before, because then the software can automatically change them when the defaults are updated.) Sorry for not replying earlier; I saw your message but somehow managed to forget about it before I had a chance to answer. --ais523 10:03, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Bugfix part 2 editprotected request

I know you or another administrator would have gotten around to it eventually, but could you please go and fulfill the editprotected request at MediaWiki talk:Common.js#Bugfix part 2 before any more users complain? Thanks for your help! —Remember the dot (talk) 03:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! —Remember the dot (talk) 03:49, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD log link trouble

Something is messing up the step #3 link to the articles for deletion log page at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_to_list_pages_for_deletion. I thought it was your change at Template:Plainlink, but that wasn't it. I can't find where the problem is and people may not be able to know how to post AfDs without that being fixed. Template:AfD in 3 steps might lead you to the source. Please look into this. Thanks. -- Jreferee (Talk) 02:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

If you open the page Template:AfD in 3 steps, you will see the string

Open the  {{plainlink|url={{SERVER}}{{localurl:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/{{CURRENTYEAR}}_{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}_{{CURRENTDAY}}|action=edit}}|'''articles for deletion log'''}} page.

Something in this string used to cause a dynamic link to appear for the Articles for deletion/Log/ at theWikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_to_list_pages_for_deletion page in step #III. Now, there is no dynamic link. -- Jreferee (Talk) 02:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Great. It looks like you fixed it. Out of curiosity, which page had the problem? -- Jreferee (Talk) 03:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Broken template

By the way, this change broke some pages that use Template:Infobox actor. Specifically, any page that had {{Infobox actor|imagesize=|other stuff}} worked before, but doesn't now. That's because {{#if:{{{imagesize|}}}|{{{imagesize}}}|220px}} is not equivalent to {{{imagesize|220px}}}. I have no idea how many pages ended up broken. Cheers, User:dbenbenn 03:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Template:Db-meta

Why, exactly, have you changed this template to make it harder to see? --Calton | Talk 02:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

It's been standardised per WP:TS. All of the template messages used on articles are going to be (or have been) updated
Really. And yet the result doesn't look at all like "standardised" templates. --Calton | Talk 02:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Nope, it doesn't. See {{Db-spam}}. And it looked like that when I first added it, and looked like that after I purged the page in question. --Calton | Talk 03:03, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
And the tag here -- the first time I've ever visited the page, so it's not a cache issue theer -- doesn't look "standardised", either. --Calton | Talk 03:05, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

What has happened to the pink box with your edit? Tyrenius 05:32, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

re: RfDs for redirects

Good morning. A couple of things to remember about redirects. First, it is very hard (read "functionally impossible") to know for sure which ones are in use and which are not. Redirects for templates can be aliases may be used via substitution. When substituted, you no longer see a reference via "what links here". It could have been used just yesterday and there would be no way to know. And while you may think the redirect is useless (and in some of the recent cases, I don't necessarily see its utility, either), we can't know how everyone else edits Wikipedia. It might be very useful to someone else. The threshold for redirects is deliberately set very low.

The flip side is that deleting a redirect does not save Wikipedia anything. Remember that everything we do gets preserved in history - even deleted pages are still in the "hidden" history. We get no system resources back by deleting something. On the contrary, the act of deleting creates yet another record in the system logs that has to be stored. Leaving the redirect alone is less expensive than bothering to delete it. We should not go around creating redirects without reason and we should always delete a redirect that is actively harmful but once a redirect has been created in good-faith, there's very little point to deleting it.

As for watchlists, a surprising number of users don't use them (or use them incorrectly by watchlisting everything they've ever edited and so their watchlist is so large that it's functionally useless). I do watchlist the article pages I care about as you suggest but I suspect that we're the minority. We can't depend on that as a gauge for interest in a page.

I'll also tell you that there are many templates I use actively on the anti-vandalism patrol but I do not have them watchlisted because I don't care about the endless debates over minor changes in wording. If I watchlisted all them, my own list would become unmanageable. If you ever moved {{test1}} and the rest of that series, I have to admit that I probably wouldn't notice for months.

Thanks for your comments. It's always a pleasure to talk to people who are committed to making this the best possible encyclopedia. Rossami (talk) 11:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

RFD Nominations

You tagged Template:2007 aL Central Standings and Template:2007 al Central Standings on 14-Sep, but you didn't list them on WP:RFD. Can you please complete the nominations? Thanks. -- JLaTondre 18:35, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I forgot to save my edits to the log page. Thanks for the heads-up. --MZMcBride 18:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

RE: Really?

Well, at least it's not as confusing as this. Face-wink.svg[[Animum | talk]] 22:36, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

"It's not easy being green..."

So, what are we going to use green for? This ambox colour code just isn't complete if we don't have green in it.
-- Denelson83 22:56, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Already did. See WT:TS#Where's green? -- Denelson83 23:01, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Templates...

Hello there. I saw your changes to a few templates and like the new visual look. It would be nice to update the Indonesia Project collaboration banner - do you have any ideas? Perhaps you would be kind enough to change the banner your self, and I could then incorporate some of your ideas into other Indonesia project banners. kind regards --Merbabu 06:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

West Wing episode articles

Hello, I've noticed that you wrote the plot summaries for several articles on episodes of The West Wing. However, those plot summaries are word-for-word copies of the official West Wing plot summaries on WarnerBros.com, which is a copyright violation and a violation of Wikipedia policy. Therefore, please remove these infringing plot summaries immediately and replace them with non-infringing ones (i.e. ones written in your own words). Thank you very much. --Hnsampat 21:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to the site notice.

At 22:00:24UTC to introduced a site notice to enwikipedia which was both misguided and factually incorrect [2]. It is counterproductive to claim that an issue is being worked on when it is not. Please do not do this again in the future. Thank you. --Gmaxwell 01:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Template:rfd

Sorry to bother you, but I made a suggestion for changing the wording of the Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion template. Could you take a look at it and give your opinion? Thanks. - Mtmelendez (Talk|UB|Home) 01:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Very well. Thanks for the reply. - Mtmelendez (Talk|UB|Home) 03:08, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

User:Mtmelendez/Wikipedia CNRs

Alas, I must call it a night. Continue it if you like, I'll put a couple of hours on it tomorrow. I hope it's turning out ok. - Mtmelendez (Talk|UB|Home) 03:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I think I've finished for now. Check the page out now: I've segregated the info as much as I could, adding RDR justifications where they applied. I think the best approach is to invite different users into the discussion at the page or at WT:RFD and start working from there. As you can see, it won't be easy RFD'ing 68 CNRs in the same discussion. We should try to analyze them first, one by one, and then nominate them individually, or in groups of 5 or 10. Redirects which are OK as-is should be stricken from the list. What do you think? - Mtmelendez (Talk|UB|Home) 22:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

There's a possibility I won't log on for tonight, so have fun with the list. I'll check back with you tomorrow. - Mtmelendez (Talk|UB|Home) 22:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Help requested

Hi MZMcBride, please help with the Ralph Nader page, people are reverting the consensus changes again. Thank you CGijits 18:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Film template

Okay, you got me. :P What did I do wrong? It still isn't creating the right task force importance categories. Girolamo Savonarola 04:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Still looking...you might have to hold my hand on this one... Girolamo Savonarola 04:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that is what my requested diff does - it adds the needed importance parameter. Did I implement it wrong? Girolamo Savonarola 04:15, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Maybe I'm being really obtuse here, but the importance parameter is in both the subpage template, where the second half is more or less the same as the first half, except with importance instead of class. And the importance parameter for this template is what I'm trying to edit into the main template's references to the subpage template. This is why I'm confused - why is the subpage template handling the class half fine, while passing over the importance half? Again, maybe I'm missing something really basic, but I thought that with this requested edit and my recent edit to the subpage, that I had covered both sides of the equation. Girolamo Savonarola 05:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Radiation biology

Please say why you have deleted this article. Biscuittin 22:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. There seems to have been some confusion with the pages Radiobiology, Radiobiologist and Radiation biology but I think it is now sorted out. Biscuittin 08:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Template:Softredirect

Please add the id "softredirect" to the span enclosing the link to the target page, your change removed this, and there is code in my monobook.js (there might not be now, i'm in the middle of restructuring my scripts, but in that case i just haven't put it back yet) that relies on this. —Random832 03:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Template protections

Can I ask why you've protected Template:Football amongst others? We are regularly adding new task forces and this now prevents us from doing this...has this been discussed anywhere? Thanks, Paulbrock 20:41, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me; can you please suggest the best way to get an admin to add tested changes to the template? Thank you! Paulbrock 23:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I would like to add the Liverpool task force to the template, in the form of a parameter 'liverpool'. As it is protected I can't. Would it be possible to have a look? The change needed is listed at Template talk:Football#Add Liverpool. Thanks. John Hayestalk 13:57, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. John Hayestalk 19:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you again, I need a slight change to the template, there was an issue with categories. Again the change is listed at the bottom of Template talk:Football#Add Liverpool. Thanks. John Hayestalk 21:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I have added the change to the sandbox, if you could sync them again. John Hayestalk 07:27, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. John Hayestalk 10:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Template:Film/Class

I'd like to ask that you please undo your edit to the page. The whole point of the subpage is to create a switch operator so that the class designations do not need to be case-sensitive in practice on the article talk pages. This is consistent with the WPMILHIST template, which was largely cribbed during the latest round of revisions. Many thanks! Girolamo Savonarola 05:02, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Disregard above. Apologies - it look me a second to see the {{uc: operator. Girolamo Savonarola 05:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Tibetan places on the wiki map

Hi I've recently been adding the Tibetan towns and villages to wikipedia complete with coordinates. However the titles of the new villages I have been adding aren't showing on the wiki mini atlas in the globe. If you look at Tibet on the map only the larger places like Lhasa, Dhingri, Shigatse, Golmud etc are showing when it ought to show the titles of smaller places like Alamdo, Azog, Baicang etc and tens of others i have been adding when you zoom in. PLease can you help me because I am trying to draw up a detailed map of Tibet as I add these articles but they are just not registering as places on the map ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 09:38, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Seriously confusing

How can you suppose that the Arianism Template should be deleted? What is your logic on that?--Blue Tie 06:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Templates

Thanks for pointing out the WP:DOT project! It's definitely something I'm interested in. I've been doing "random template" patrol through Special:Random/Template, and I've found a lot of orphaned TFD candidates, along with at least one unconverted article message. szyslak 00:48, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Removal of Sandbox Header

Hello, please be careful to not remove sandbox headers as you did here. Thank you! Icestorm815 22:06, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Template:Userpage

Hi MZMcBride - your edit to Template:Userpage has messed up page layouts very badly (incompatible with right-aligned userboxes); I don't know enough about template editing to rectify this, can you check to solve the above problem, or put it back to how it was before, please! - thanks, MPF 08:38, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Super, thanks! - MPF 19:35, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Northwich Victoria F.C.

It's basically an indefinite problem until someone can find another bot owner to automatically undo the removal of the teammate list. The insane person disrupting the page came back after 4 months of protecting before (and always comes back after it's unprotected), so yes, it's still a problem. Cowman109Talk 20:16, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, now that Simon Rusk is out on loan, the English nationalist only seems to change the listed nationalities of those born in the UK somewhere, so I'll unprotect the page (at least until another English player comes along who is of another nationaly). Cowman109Talk 21:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your knowledgeable help here. It's good having a template wizard around.--Chaser - T 22:28, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Another template question

Hi. The template "Template:Astronomy portal daily picture" was tagged "deprecated" by you and later deleted by ^demon. I am questioning the rational for this. I was using it to help me maintain the Portal:Astronomy, and I see no reason to delete it. Can you enlighten me, please? Thanks! Awolf002 02:55, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification!! Awolf002 11:08, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

IRC cloak request

I am MZMcBride on freenode and I would like the cloak wikipedia/MZMcBride. Thanks. --MZMcBride 19:14, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

reqphoto Alfeld

Hi, as there are images in the article Alfeld, could you please be more specific what is required so it can be done?Traveler100 07:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

strawman

You're wrong: I never said double redirects should exist and I never said a bot shouldn't be fixing them. Michael Hardy 00:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Latest release/preview templates

I have responded on my talk page. GracenotesT § 18:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Der_Ring_des_Nibelungen/Comments

Please explain why you deleted this page on which comments are kept from assessments as per standard naming conventions.--Peter cohen 11:55, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I've now found an explanation for your mysterious code. Of course there is no corresponding page. Every Talk:xxxx/Comments page has no corresponding article page. It just contains comments with respect to an assessment of the article xxxx. As I said this is a standard naming convention. Please undelete the page and every other other comments page which you have mistakenly deleted too.--Peter cohen 12:03, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the restore --Peter cohen 19:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Reports

Hi, I was wondering how you made those template reports. I'm interested in creating a similar list. Thanks. Rocket000 23:12, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't know you had more. I meant these → Report 1, Report 2, Report 3, Report 4, and Report 5. Rocket000 01:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, Thanks! Rocket000 01:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Firefox screenshot 09 26 07.png)

Nuvola apps important blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Firefox screenshot 09 26 07.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 22:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Supreme case

Hey thanks for cleaning up Liverpool, New York & Philadelphia S. S. Co. v. Commissioners of Emigration, it was my first Supreme Court case article - didn't quite know how everything worked...I decided to join Cdogsimmon's efforts and fill in some of those redlinks from the AfD. Dreadstar 04:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

CC templates

Thanks for the message. I removed the |- from each of the new versions and added the HTML comments to the top of them. As for the doc page, I really have no preference on that, so I'll leave it up to you. --CrazyLegsKC 04:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Vitruvian Barnstar.png The da Vinci Barnstar
Thank you so much for updating the templates. I'd like to award you this Barnstar for your efficient sysopping! :) CrazyLegsKC 20:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: WP:DOT

Re: User talk:Black Falcon#WP:DOT

I deleted another 40 or so, but there are still about 90 remaining, and I won't be able to get to them for several hours (until about 16:00 UTC). I'll finish them off then. Incidentally, what should we do with templates that have been substed? A similar issue was raised at Wikipedia talk:Deprecated and orphaned templates#Non-transcluded templates for templates that are supposed to be substed, but I'm referring to cases where a regular template was substed into an article. For instance, Template:Deathmetal was created and added to the article Death metal in April 2006, but at some point, it was substed into the article. What's the correct procedure in those cases? Should I re-subst the template (noting this in the edit summary), update the substed version to account for any changes made to the article but not the template, and only then delete? – Black Falcon (Talk) 05:20, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, that should make things simpler. I'm signing off now, but will tackle the backlog upon returning. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 05:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Done! I've deleted all of the templates except the following:
Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 22:20, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

RE: PMOG article deletion

Aloha, could you provide a reason for this page deletion? Log/delete&page=Passively_Multiplayer_Online_Game --Jeffmcneill talk contribs 20:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

School infoboxes

I've just modified {{Infobox School}} so it is compatible with the codes of all the templates you sent me, and a few more I found. Although testing is still needed, all the school infoboxes can now be redirected to {{Infobox School}}. Tell me if any problems arises as this happens (it would be amazing if there wasn't one or two minor problems). --Philip Stevens 16:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Short pages

I've performed the query you requested and put the result on User:Erwin85/Scratch1. --Erwin85 11:21, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

SCOTUS infobox

I can't get the court membership to show up at Tennard v. Dretke. Would you have a look for me?--chaser - t 00:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. The punctuation between the dates is a regular hyphen. Cheers. --MZMcBride 04:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)