User talk:Oxenhillshaw

Image tagging for Image:Lionelsackvillewest.jpg[edit]

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Dinan.gif[edit]

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Little Windmill Street[edit]

Little Windmill Street, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Little Windmill Street satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Little Windmill Street and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Little Windmill Street during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. — iridescent (talk to me!) 22:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Fittleworth St Mary.jpg[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Fittleworth St Mary.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 image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 11:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:West_Tarring_St_Andrew.JPG[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:West_Tarring_St_Andrew.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 image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Jusjih (talk) 03:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{Ireland-duke-stub}}[edit]

Hi - a stub template or category which you created has been nominated for deletion or renaming at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type, which was not proposed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, does not meet the standard requirements for a stub type, either through being incorrectly named, ambiguously scoped, or through failure to meet standards relating to the current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha? 23:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marquess of Hamilton[edit]

{{subst:Marquess of Hamilton, of Strabane|Very short articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article}}|nn-warn-reason|Marquess of Hamilton, of Strabane|Very short articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article}}|Marquess of Hamilton, of Strabane|header=1}} WilliamMThompson (talk) 10:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Subsidiary titles[edit]

Hello. I have seen that you have added information to a number of subsidiary peerages that were previously redirects (Baron Alanbrooke, Baron Rideau, Lord Ogilvy of Airlie, et cetera). This information is already included in the articles on the substantive peerages, so these articles are completely superfluous. There is also no need to add the time period a person held a peerage in the list of holders, like you have done at Earl Alexander of Tunis, Earl of Albemarle et cetera. Regards, Tryde (talk) 19:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is also no need to create separate articles on life peerages. They should just redirect to the article on the holder of the life peerage. Regards, Tryde (talk) 05:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability[edit]

Please read Wikipedia:Notability. I am afraid articles like James Chichester, Earl of Belfast, Sir John Ackroyd, 2nd Baronet, Sir Antony Guy Acland, 5th Baronet and Sir Stair Agnew, 6th Baronet, do not meet the criteria set out in Wikipedia Notability guidelines. Tryde (talk) 13:53, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:West Tarring St Andrew.JPG[edit]

Image Copyright problem

Hi Oxenhillshaw!
We thank you for uploading Image:West Tarring St Andrew.JPG, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 18:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Section headings.[edit]

Hi Oxenhillshaw

May I point out that in Wikipedia section headings only the first word and any proper nouns are capitalised.--Charles (talk) 21:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wscc logo.png[edit]

Hi there. I've edited File:Wscc logo.png, to remove a number of fair-use rationales. It's not enough to have added a fair-use template: the rationale has to be valid too.

Wikipedia's policy on the use of unlicensed copyrighted material requires that we use non-free images as minimally as possible, and only where the image contributes significantly to the article. So while it's okay to use a logo on the article about the logo's owner, it's not okay to use the same logo on every related page. — mholland (talk) 17:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boundary info[edit]

Heya. Just a note to say "Thanks" for all the boundary review stuff you're adding. Sometimes I feel like the only one working these UK constituency articles, it's good to see someone else working away. As you can see from my contribs, I'm getting myself busy with another long and weary task in Scotland.... =! doktorb _words^deeds 06:53, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Result boxes for new constituencies[edit]

Please stop removing information useful information from result boxes for new parliamentary constituencies, as you did here: [1]. The changes and swing are determined from the notional results, as calculated by Rallings and Thrasher. See the bottommost thread on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom. Wereon (talk) 12:54, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something went wrong ...[edit]

... in this edit by you, when the list of MPs got replaced with a an incorrect one.

I have now fixed it, but just thought I'd draw it your attention.

Hope this helps. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox peerage title[edit]

I don't know if these add anything to peerage articles and have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage. Tryde (talk) 19:05, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Italics[edit]

Please do not italicize territorial designations in peerage articles. Tryde (talk) 18:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled[edit]

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

This permission does not give you any special status or authority
Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:09, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sir John Acland, 3rd Baronet[edit]

The article Sir John Acland, 3rd Baronet has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

After 5 years, notability not established. Only claim to notability seems to be that he was a baronet.

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 18:58, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sir John Acland, 3rd Baronet for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sir John Acland, 3rd Baronet is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sir John Acland, 3rd Baronet 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 19:25, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Myles Ponsonby, 12th Earl of Bessborough for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Myles Ponsonby, 12th Earl of Bessborough is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myles Ponsonby, 12th Earl of Bessborough 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Flaming Ferrari (talk) 14:39, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of David Brudenell-Bruce, Earl of Cardigan for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article David Brudenell-Bruce, Earl of Cardigan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Brudenell-Bruce, Earl of Cardigan 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Flaming Ferrari (talk) 16:51, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Arms[edit]

Hi. I was just wondering, do you intend to do any more arms of British nobles? Your illustrations were all of a very high quality, but you seem to have stopped making them. Zacwill16 (talk) 17:51, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for East Wittering and Bracklesham[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing—East Wittering and Bracklesham—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:49, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Myles Ponsonby, 12th Earl of Bessborough for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Myles Ponsonby, 12th Earl of Bessborough is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myles Ponsonby, 12th Earl of Bessborough (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article.

Pilaz (talk) 08:14, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Cote, West Sussex for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cote, West Sussex is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cote, West Sussex until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

PicturePerfect666 (talk) 16:09, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]