User talk:Pmbcomm

Welcome

Hello, Pmbcomm, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Sandstein 05:48, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of Petroleum Industry in Canada

Looking good already! Well done. Bubba hot ep 10:44, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Petroleum industry

	Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! You recently added an external link to Blogspot in an article. It has been removed because the link pointed to a non-encyclopedic source. Please refer to Wikipedia's policy on external links for more information. --Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 01:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"History of Petroleum Industry" articles

First of all: you've done a great job on the History of the petroleum industry in Canada... May very well be a featured article one day.

As for the History of the petroleum industry in North America article, I left my comments on its talk page. GregorB 12:42, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of natural gas liquids industry in Canada

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as History of natural gas liquids industry in Canada, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://languageinstinct.blogspot.com/2006/08/richness-of-discovery.html Copyright 1998 Amoco Canada Petroleum Co [1], and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), you can comment to that effect on Talk:History of natural gas liquids industry in Canada. Then you should do one of the following:

Make a note on the original website that re-use is permitted under the GFDL and state at Talk:History of natural gas liquids industry in Canada where we can find that note; or
Send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:History of natural gas liquids industry in Canada.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! --Interiot 19:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I have explained elsewhere, I own the copyright for this article. I am donating one chapter of one of my books to wikipedia. The text of the entire book is available online in my blog at languageinstinct.blogspot.com. Please do not pull this text. Thank you.Pmbcomm 21:10, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Tafari

Hi, sorry about the delay answering. I have responded on my talk page. – Bubba hot ep 08:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will also comment on the problem with the above article (which has now been deleted) on my talk page aswell. Bubba hot ep 08:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Charles R. Stelck‎

Hame of Fame. Thanks for fixing that crazy typo. Clerks 15:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Canadianpetroleumhistory

I fixed up that template last night and just wanted to touch base with you; looks like you were able to get it into the article without a problem. Contact me if you need anything else. Best of luck and happy editing! --Merovingian ※ Talk 15:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I fixed that. :) The problem came from the link in the template; it was a redirect and that messes up the title in template on the article. --Merovingian ※ Talk 00:26, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of the petroleum industry in Canada

I left a comment on Talk:History of the petroleum industry in Canada. In essence, the changes are great; they both solve the previous problem and lift the standard of the article. Thanks! --rxnd ( t | € | c ) 06:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, six months ago I noted that it looked "like a very promising article". Glad I was correct about that one. A series of articles now. Great work... GregorB 21:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's excellent. Well done. Truly what the real spirit of Wikipedia is about. – B.hotep ^u/_t• 19:34, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In recognition of your great work

		The Original Barnstar
		In recognition of your hard work and perseverance over the months on making a raw, but nevertheless interesting, article into a great article. Well done. – B.hotep ^u/_t• 19:37, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Barnstar

Thank you very much, although I will be the first to admit that your contributions were crucial. --Merovingian (T, C, E) 20:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Natural gas

Hello... I thnk we're reverting each other due to edit conflicts. Let's take it to the talk page and resolve it there. Thanks. --Ckatz^chat _spy 22:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Test

400 cubicmeters^{[convert: unknown unit]}

Lightmouse and year-links

For your information, Lightmouse has a long history of year-link stripping, and has carried on a campaign of it despite many complaints and even threats of blocking. See the history of his talk-page for more on this. (Inconveniently, he does not keep talk-page archives any more, or if he does there is no ready access to them from his talk-page.) -- Lonewolf BC 17:44, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

Hi. Why did you undo my edit? --John 04:24, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like people to use the template whether they are at the beginning or end of the story. Also, sulphur is spelled with ph in Canada. Check the Oxford Dictionary of Canadian English. Sorry. You spent a lot of time on this, I know. 04:27, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope. See Sulphur#Spelling. Please sign your posts by typing ~~~~. --John 04:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OWN

I just read "I am voluntarily contributing a chapter of one of my books to Wikipedia." Please urgently read WP:OWN. Thank you. We don't need to display a template twice on one page, it is overkill. --John 04:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff

I really appreciate your work with Wikipedia. I know that I don't own anything on this document, and I welcome improvements from other people, like yourself. However, I also have the capacity to make judgements of my own, and in this case I want to use Canadian spelling and I think articles of this length -- about 5000 words each -- can use the template twice without it being overkill.

Best regards04:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I appreciate very keenly the variety of spellings in English. As a chemistry teacher though, with nearly 20 years experience teaching in Scotland, I have to say I think you are wrong on the spelling issue. IUPAC standardised on "sulfur" a good many years ago. (Personally I was against it, but they didn't ask me.) On scientific articles (which these clearly are), Wikipedia uses "sulfur" as it is an international project. By the same logic the light metal is always spelled aluminium (not "aluminum"). I appreciate the good work you have done, and am glad that you realise you grant others the right to change your work when you edit here. However if we cannot agree between the two of us,the next step will be to centralise the discussion and let others have a say.--John 04:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concur. Tyrenius 06:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sign

As a courtesy to other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, and WikiProject pages. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then be automatically added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). For further info, read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. Tyrenius 06:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Almost right. It's 4 tildes, not 5! [2] Tyrenius 14:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of the petroleum industry in Canada (frontier exploration and development)

I have added several "clarify" tags to the article as the meanings are unclear. The words that need explaing are "spudded", "tight hole" and "jackup rig". Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 07:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The unclear words are something I noticed a while back and not a particular problem just for that article. We all tend to write about what we know and use the jargon/slang that we are used to and forget that others don't always understand them. I noticed it because I am guilty of the same thing in airport articles. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 07:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just did this. I'm not sure how the layout looked to you but I've viewed it on 3 different monitors/computers and what I get is 4 sections in the opening; the map on the left with the table of contents next to it, then the opening section and the template on the right hand side. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 14:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That looks fine on this one so it should work OK on most then. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:20, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:HRAJack Tafari.JPG

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:HRAJack Tafari.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. Shell ^babelfish 16:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Energy policy of Canada

I have already reverted to your last edit of this article, after studying the edit history. A large deletion by an editor with a redlink userpage is usually not a good faith edit, but yours was. Sorry. Edison (talk) 00:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JACOS

Hi. There is a new article about Japan Canada Oil Sands Limited (JACOS). This article is quite messy and currently nominated for deletion. However, I think this article is worth to be improved. I hope you could help as you have more knowledge about the subject.Beagel (talk) 07:53, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Regional Chronology of Operas, Composers and Librettists

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article A Regional Chronology of Operas, Composers and Librettists, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of A Regional Chronology of Operas, Composers and Librettists. On the other side ^Contribs|@ 16:01, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summeries and preview

Hi, I noticed that when you edit you often don't use edit summeries. These help other editors follow what is going on to an article, and is more transparent (some editors leave out a summery when they have something to hide... not something I've seen you do, but it's another reason the summeries are nice). Also, if you're going to make many small tweaks, like in History of the petroleum industry in Canada where you moved the {{Canadianpetroleumhistory}} template about 10 times, you should really be using the preview button or the sandbox, so that the edit history doesn't get cluttered. Thanks, NJGW (talk) 12:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:SamsaraFoundationlogo.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Hi Pmbcomm!
We thank you for uploading Image:SamsaraFoundationlogo.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) 14:06, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

History of the petroleum industry in Canada 2

The article may be completely accurate — I'm not saying it isn't — but we still have to cite sources. Wikipedia:Verifiability, which is policy, states that "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation." I don't know if the article contains anything likely to be challenged, as I've only read a small part of it, but it certainly does contain several quotations, which need to be sourced. Mr. Absurd (talk) 00:06, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, on a somewhat unrelated note, I noticed that you didn't sign your post — please do so using ~~~~. Also, you leave few edit summaries, which are very much encouraged and help others understand what changes you've made. Mr. Absurd (talk) 00:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've removed the references tag again without any reasoning or explanation. As I have stated, all quotations must be sourced, according to Wikipedia:Verifiability, a Wikipedia policy — actually, a key policy. It cannot simply be ignored. If you have a question or issue, please discuss this with me on my talk page or the article's talk page. Mr. Absurd (talk) 02:07, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see there is a discussion here about it. I have reverted (diff) your 'reference additions' (and one change of an internal in an external links, to same server). I seriously doubt if a blogspot can be used as a reliable source here, and the change of internal link to an external link is also not a proper way of linking. Could you please find reliable sources? Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 14:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting very tiresome. You seem to be having trouble reading. The sources were not self-published. They were published by reliable, credible sources. Your efforts are vandalism of a kind I don't understand.

Note the comments above: We need to cite sources. Would it be better to get out a copy of a book andinput that information so that people can go to the library, find the book and look up the reference? How does your mind function?15:06, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

That is not vandalism. You are writing an article here, based on a self-published source. When you get as a comment there are no sources, you source it to your own work. This source is not a primary source, it is not a suitable reliable source (the sources you use to write your blogspot are), and you do have a conflict of interest. There are others here who have the same questions, in this same thread on this talkpage, so I ask you to discuss this thoroughly before adding the references again. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 14:15, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also removed the references to the edukits. Also those are not suitable sources (actually, they are not reliable sources, there is no independent overview). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 14:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you have to cite sources, but please not to a blogspot. You say there are several books, why not properly source it to the books itself? And there must be more sources than only educational material and blogspots. I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 15:10, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm beginning to feel worn out by your intransigence, I must say. I suppose the best news is that we both believe in what we are doing quite strongly.

I'd note that the Edukit info is produced by a public museum. I acknowledge it isn't well written, but it is correct.

What is your hang-up about blogspot? If I cited the work of a Nobel Prize winner with a blog would you remove that too? There is a lot of authoritative material on blogs, including much of mine. (I'm not comparing myself to a Nobel Prize winner, but the way.)

You haven't convinced m. I'm certainly not willing to get out my books and copy the references when they are already available on line. That sounds like the kind of solution an academic would propose.

I hope someone else will propose a solution to this quandary. 15:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, the books are there already in a section, they are certainly more reliable than a blogspot, and if I understand you correctly, they do cite the same info. I have in the past often removed the blogspot in favour of the original, which I think is better (the blogspots are subject to change (or even, shutdown of the server), a link to a hardcopy book would always be traceable (unless all available copies would be burned). Hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 15:25, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, could you sign using four tildes? In the way you are signing now your username does not appear. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 15:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, two of the books cited have nothing to do with the article -- the My and Anderson books. They are just items people added because they liked them. It shows a weakness in the very thing we are talking about. I think your work on this article has really junked it up, and I regret that. Could we agree to take it back to where it was in Bearcat's last edit? I think that was your original proposal, in any case. What say you?Pmbcomm (talk) 15:38, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, I think it is better to bring this to a broader group, is there an appropriate wikiproject? If the two books do not apply properly, then they should be removed as well. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 15:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Image:Barack-obama-mother.jpg

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Image:Barack-obama-mother.jpg. Since you were interested in the discussion, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 86.166.86.153 (talk) 14:03, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Yasus Afaris

A tag has been placed on Yasus Afaris requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Vianello (talk) 03:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to resubmit this article, it would be wise to make sure beforehand that you have the sources necessary to demonstrate the subject's notability. Please peruse the linked page. However, the decision to delete it did not rest with me. All I did was flag it for the possibility because no indication of notability was offered. - Vianello (talk) 05:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:SamsaraFoundationMap.gif

Thank you for uploading File:SamsaraFoundationMap.gif. 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.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 21:58, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External link spamming

Hi! I noticed that you added quite a few links to a blog called "Language Matters". Please be aware that blogs shouldn't be added as reliable sources or external links unless they are by someone who is exceedingly notable within the field and is a recognized authority. See WP:LINKSTOAVOID for what I mean by this. If this is your blog, I *highly* recommend that you refrain from adding your blog to the wiki because it can be seen as spamming and a conflict of interest. I'm attaching the following so you can read it:

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 10:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

\thank you for your comments. I am one of Canada's most widely published historians of the oil industry. The articles I reference in the blogs were previously published in authoritative oil and gas magazines or as my books. You will find details on the blog.

The only problem is that you weren't just adding them to oil and gas articles, you were also adding your article to a lot of articles that had nothing to do with oil and gas. For example, you added an article to the Snow White pages and you also added an article about marathons to tons of other pages. This is where it seemed less like you adding an article to expand upon the subject and more to just have your articles added. What I really recommend is that rather than add your own pages, that you post them on the talk pages and then ask if those would be considered reliable enough links to use as a source or not. I also recommend that you go through Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard to ask if it's a source that would be considered reliable enough to add to the page. There's just a lot of conflict of interest issues that come up when someone adds their blog to various pages and it's absolutely best if you were to try to get others to add the articles rather than you adding them yourself. It just is too easy for it to be seen as spamming and it's better to CYA than to just add.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 12:27, 11 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

Thank you for those comments. The articles you mention have all been published in my books or in reputable magazines. Wikipedia's glossary of language teaching terms and ideas, for example, actually originated as a glossary for one of my books, etc.

I don't have much time to put into Wikipedia any more, so I won't likely be causing much more upset.pmbcomm 14:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

AN

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:28, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:HRAJack Tafari.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:HRAJack Tafari.JPG. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:28, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Early History of the petroleum industry in Canada

Hello Peter,

First let me congratulate you on an excellent series of articles surrounding this topic! I was hoping you might be open to a change surrounding the John Shaw oil gusher. Recently the Oil Heritage Museum here in Lambton County has gone back to look over the timeline associated with Shaw's discovery. Two newspaper articles from 1862 seem to place the date on 16 January 1862 instead of the dates the wikipedia article quotes. Perhaps the quote from Dr. Winchell could be changed as well to the Hamilton Evening Times description of the event?

ftp://ftp.county-lambton.on.ca/Museums/OMC/Oil%20Heritage%20Resource%20Database/Early%20History%20of%20Oil%20Springs/Year%20of%20the%20Gushers,%201862/Shaw%20Gusher,%20Newspaper%20Reports%20After%20It%20Came%20In/Hamilton%20Evening%20Times,%2001.20.1862,%20Extraordinary%20Flowing%20Oil%20Well.pdf

ftp://ftp.county-lambton.on.ca/Museums/OMC/Oil%20Heritage%20Resource%20Database/Early%20History%20of%20Oil%20Springs/Year%20of%20the%20Gushers,%201862/Shaw%20Gusher,%20Newspaper%20Reports%20After%20It%20Came%20In/London%20Free%20Press,%2001.22.1862,%20A%20Freak%20Fortune%20Enniskillen%20Oil.pdf

I wanted to touch base with you first since I would also be interested in expanding the post-Oil Springs section of the article to include a few more details on the shift in oil production to Petrolia around the turn of the century.

Please let me know what you think. I'm new to wikipedia and wanted to contribute, but at the same time did not want to dive into deleting others work without getting in touch first. Lstempien (talk) 16:14, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Photo of RS Technologies utility pole.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Photo of RS Technologies utility pole.jpg, which you've attributed to RS Technologies. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 18:39, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Pmbcomm. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:12, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Photo of RS Technologies utility pole.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Photo of RS Technologies utility pole.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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 00:08, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian Oil Sands Innovation Alliance (COSIA) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Canadian Oil Sands Innovation Alliance (COSIA), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the prompts on the Articles for Creation template atop the page. — Insert CleverPhrase Here 18:36, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Canadian Oil Sands Innovation Alliance for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Canadian Oil Sands Innovation Alliance 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/Canadian Oil Sands Innovation Alliance 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. shoy (reactions) 13:50, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Canadian Oil Sands Innovation Alliance

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Canadian Oil Sands Innovation Alliance, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:24, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:RS Technologies logo.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:RS Technologies logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Jon Kolbert (talk) 05:34, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Pmbcomm. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Pmbcomm. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with your custom signature

You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. A change to Wikipedia's software has made your current custom signature incompatible with the software.

The problem: Your preferences are set to interpret your custom signature as wikitext. However, your current custom signature does not contain any wikitext.

The solutions: You can reset your signature to the default, or you can fix your signature.

Solution 1: Reset your signature to the default:

Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
Remove anything in the Signature: text box. (It might already be empty.)
Click the blue "Save" button at the bottom of the page. (The red "Restore all default settings" button will reset all of your preference settings, not just the signature.)

Solution 2: Fix your custom signature:

Find the signature section in the first tab of Special:Preferences.
Uncheck the box (☑︎→☐) that says "Treat the above as wiki markup."
Click the blue "Save" button at the bottom of the page.

More information about custom signatures is available at Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing how everyone sees your signature. If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures. Thank you. 18:03, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Alexander Earle Gray

Hello, Pmbcomm. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Alexander Earle Gray".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:40, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]