User talk:SimonATL

Welcome!

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SimonATL.

Please click Here to leave me a new message. or Here to send me an email

User talk:SimonATL/Archive

Physical fitness

Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia as we drive for print or DVD publication; see the welcome page to learn more. Thanks. Monkeyman^(talk) 18:25, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

United States Marine Corps

Your comment on User talk:El C is misplaced. El_C removed the childish vandalism; he didn't add it. User:L0gic is your vandal. TacoDeposit 02:47, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I had just figured that out even as you noticed - and corrected my mistaken post. El_C was the ANTI-vandal and I'm adding a nice page for LOgic.

Request for edit summary

Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 28% for major edits and 33% for minor edits. (Based on the last 150 major and 141 minor edits in the article namespace.)

This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 04:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I make a lot of minute mods and usually only make a summary if there's something significant but will make sure not to miss this useful step. Which article were you referring to and what did you think of the overall article. Thanks for taking the time to comment and suggest! SimonATL 04:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To see which article you put summary or you did not, you can look up at the top of the browser window, and click on "Contributions". Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 18:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:James Webb Sec Nav.jpg

Your fair use claim doesn't fly. Fair use would only work if it were being used to illustrate an article about AP. This is a copyrighted image, and its use in Wikipedia to illustrate the James Webb article is a copyright violation. User:Zoe|^(talk) 03:47, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portal

Saw you user page and that you are a 22 year Marines Thought you might be interested in helping us with the new USMC portal if you have some time. Yut--Looper5920 19:30, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James Webb

I don't think the webmaster of Webb's website has the legal authority to release an AP photo. Only AP can do that. However, copyright authorizations require explicit permissions -- see Wikipedia:Copyright problems#Instructions for special cases. User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:01, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't understand what you were telling me. Well, see the link above for how to handle the permission. User:Zoe|^(talk) 22:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the end, Webb's people released on of THEIR photos, not an AP photo. SimonATL 22:56, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I now understand that they gave you permission, but they need somewhere to identify that they have given permission for the photo to be released to the GFDL. User:Zoe|^(talk) 22:56, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latest Work

I added a page on the 10th Marines, a unit in which I assigned for almost 4 years as a young lt and Forward observer (FO). The USMC Historical Center, a number of years back begain publishing regimental histories. Accordingly, I got a PDF file called "A Brief History of the 10th Marines." from this guy who sells them for pennies plus shipping. I'll begin revising the article ASAP. I was a history major and enjoy the work. Also, I've contributed stuff to the articles on Theodore Roosevelt and his large family and emailed his great-great grandson on some fact finding. SimonATL 23:10, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gettysburg Address

Hi, thanks for your contribution. I actually did find an audio link at NPR with the recording you mentioned, and I listened to it. I ultimately decided against including it because at the time I wasn't that sure about the authenticity and validity of his recollections generations after the fact. Also I think at the time I was editing I thought this recording focused much more on a "history lesson for the kids" type of story rather than very much in the way of details specific to Gettysburg on that day. Of course, I'm just another editor, not the final authority on this, and probably you are right to have added it. Best, Kaisershatner 15:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simon, with all due respect, in reply to your comments on my talk page: "You apparently did not read my discussion of the background of this recording." Actually, I did. I think rather, it is you who have failed to read my comments above, where I say that "probably you are right to have added it," and where I explained that I wasn't confident about his recollections "generations after the fact" (ie, in 1938 when he made the recording), and where I wrote "this recording focused much more on a 'history lesson for the kids'" than about the reading of the Gettysburg Address. In any case, since I agree with your addition and admit it's just my POV about the other things, I'm not clear on why exactly your plan is "I'm going to take this up with the appeals process as this thing is authentic." What is it that you are appealing? Some free advice: you'll waste less time if you don't fight with someone who isn't arguing with you.

As for the rest of your lengthy comments, "The very fact that in his life, he did not try to sell or push this fact...actually supports its validity." I understand that is your opinion. "I'm convinced of its authenticity." Wonderful! "He became a well-respected religious writer, public lecturer and a director of the Christian Science church. (NO relation to wierdo Scientology, by the way and publisher of the Christian Science Monitor winner of 7 Pulitizer Prizes)." Thanks, I know the difference, although I'm usually a bit more respectful about other people's religious beliefs - and plenty I people I've spoken to think Christian Science is a bit wacky, FWIW. "What kind of "proof" do you need." I don't need any. As I mentioned twice above, I think you are probably right to have added it, and I certainly don't have a problem with the article asserting this is a recording of a guy who says he remembers being there. That's exactly what it is, and it's probably true that he was there and remembers it. I don't see a conflict here, but if you want to "argue" with me about it, then that's ok I guess - it's a free country and all. Best, Kaisershatner 16:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vivien Leigh images

Hi, I notice you've changed the images in the Vivien Leigh article. I appreciate that you have worked on the article to try to improve it. I have a couple of concerns. Firstly, the 1958 image of her is the only public domain image we have of her. As Wikipedia should at all times be promoting free use as much as possible, it should be the lead image. The copyright status is a greater consideration that the aesthetic. The first image of her in the barbecue dress was, a few months ago, the image in use. It was deleted because of concerns over copyright. I don't think that is now an issue because you've addressed the image description page, but its fair use status is less than the public domain status of the other, and therefore it's less suitable. I also feel that a fair use argument for two images from or relating to the same film, weakens the fair use case. The previous screenshot depicted her in character, "acting", and I think is a suitable image.

On a personal note, I am the author of this article, and although I fully realize that I do not "own" it, I do intend to keep an eye on it and ensure that it maintains its legitimacy. I'm slightly affronted that your edit summaries for the replacement of the images read "better image" chosen etc. This is a matter of opinion, and I don't think they are better images necessarily, just different, and the one of her and Gable is really the same image we've seen a thousand times. I feel frustrated that after spending several weeks writing the article, watching Gone with the Wind virtually frame by frame to find a suitable screenshot, and then nominating and seeing it through to Featured article status, the entire look of the article has been changed in the space of a few edits and a short amount of time. While the "be bold" principle is fine, I think discussing radical changes is at the very least good etiquette, especially for a featured article. - The community promoted the previous article, but might not have promoted the current version, as the use of images was discussed considerably during the process. I'm concerned the case for fair use is now weaker than it was. I'm going to revert them, and I hope and request that before making any further changes you could perhaps discuss it on the talk page. Rossrs 13:07, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, thanks for your reply. Firstly, I must apologise for the dictatorial tone of my previous message, which I truly did not mean. To be honest, my comments to you were a knee jerk reaction, and came at the end of a long, tiresome day, so I am sorry, and 24 hours later I'm wondering what I was making a fuss about. I've been thinking about the images. Firstly the 1958 image came from Wikipedia Commons, and is one of a fairly substantial group of portraits in the Canadian Library that are not restricted by copyright. There's a link on the image description page that leads to the Library and Archives Canada page ([1] We are stuck with it, but fortunately it's quite a good, dramatic image (in my opinion) though definitely not how Leigh is remembered.

I think either of the images you uploaded would be a suitable replacement for the GWTW screenshot. Part of my reasoning with the screenshot was to include Gable, because I didn't think it was right that Olivier be the only costar depicted (at that time I'd settled on the Fire over England and the Shakespeare shots), but later I added the Brando, which makes the Gable less of a requirement. I think if the Brando remains, the Gable could go. I also thought a colour image would be good as it is a technicolour picture, but the Time image does this job. So I've kind of talked myself out of the image that I was so strong about yesterda. The barbecue one is very good and I won't object if you add it, in fact I would encourage you to do so, so please go ahead. Perhaps the screenshot more correctly belongs in the article on the film itself. I'm not quite so sure about the Leigh/Gable embrace image. I don't think it gives a true sense of the film, of Leigh or even of Scarlett. I'm glad that we are having a discussion rather than an altercation, and I thank you for making that possible, by replying in such a calm manner. Rossrs 09:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the "red dress" image and replaced it with the barbecue shot. It does look a lot better. Rossrs 02:16, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cathytreks

what a kook she was! I guess we all got some comic relief--and I only hope my death photo looks as handsome as Lincoln's. :) Rjensen 04:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rjensen...you disgraced wiki for attacking my character here as well as now illegaly removing my edit on your page for the blight you did against me on the Lincoln Talk page, and stirred up A HORNETS NEST, that would be having everyone against me for what in the end became a debate for even trying... to get the truth out as many scholars have in the past, and whom continue to debate that photograph you smeared as a hoax and a lie, to this day more and more....why?

You illegaly removed my departure note to you on your wiki user page in violation of wiki policy, If I cant do it, nor can you! and they have been informed.

I have had several views of an old photograph that would clear it up, but some others use my screen name cathitreks or cathy treks or cathytreks , they are NOT me yet why does everybody have it out for me here for trying to show the truth as I believe it to be!?

I only sought the acceptance of my proofs ..........and have miserably failed. I am leaving your cleec (sp)...now sadly for me, yet maybe happily for many here after the latest attacks and smears for me, for what I genuinely believe in., and now some comments about my credentials that do not dignify a reply,

Fine...im leaving the Lincoln page you decide upon, and the narrow mindedness forever, here in what seems to be a ROSE COLOURED Lincoln Candyland only!...But folks, let us never leave the man in our hearts!

        A PERSONAL HERO TO MANY!

            ABRAHAM LINCOLN!

I'm sadly leaving this place filled with much misunderstanding from many of the wiki "comunity" and withdraw from all of you, those who dont understand my sincere motives over a issue that seems hopeless to show or debate even amounst most of you, im sorry.,... I'm really very sorry, goodbye everybody..... I only sought truth.

I am heartsick over some of the attacks upon a sincere belief regardng the evidence I tried to present, my cousin in N.Z. did post under my name with my blessings as she believed too and tried to help show we were right, sorry you dont agree.

I really wonder what Lincoln would say over it all if he could?....

Somehow I believe he'd be sorry for we who sought the truth as some of the few here did, unlike the sheep who followed the wolves

shalom

....."a couple of misunderstood jewish girl's from both the old and new worlds bow from the stage here forever on this debate."

So...see ya round the galaxy guys!...oh..."kook , eh? Rjensen".....we shall see. (Cathytreks 14:58, 23 March 2006 (UTC))[reply]

More on images

Hi, the toolserver [2] shows you have about 20 images missing source and license info. You might want to go fix them up before the untagged image elves get there, scrub them out of all articles, and delete. Most are probably PD, which should make it a pretty quick cleanup task. Thanks for helping! Stan 06:29, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, {{PD-US}} is likely the right thing for old images. URL for old images is usually good enough; there's not going to be an actual copyright holder to track down. Stan 14:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:BullochfrmL.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BullochfrmL.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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 User talk:Carnildo/images. 15:36, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Joanna Sturm

Hi! Thanks for the explanation! I think the article itself should explain the notability; it is less useful on my talk page. Now the bulk of the article is about other people and events before Joanna Sturm was even born; it is hard to spot why Joanna Sturm was notable herself. Weregerbil 09:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please go back to the article and see my expanded comments on Joanna Sturm's place in the life of Alice Roosevelt and her contributions to virtually every Roosevelt historian in the last 30 years and to 20th Century Womens history. Thanks. SimonATL 09:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article request - Artillery spotting

I saw your comment to Looper5920. I have an article request that seems right up your alley. I'm putting the finishing touches on Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima (it will soon be promoted to featured article). On the FAC page for that article, it was mentioned that we don't have an article on artillery spotting. Would you be interested in writing one? Raul654 02:55, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looper - Yes, I'd be interested but Artillery spotting is only part of a much larger picture. What used to be called in WW-II, "artillery spotting" today is considered under a much larger category of Fire Support Coordination (FSC). This would be a much more useful article and here's why. FSC includes traditional "artillery spotting," Naval Gunfire (NGF)and forward air control (FAC). So you can clobber the "bad guy" from land, sea or air and such an article could be broken up into 3 separate parts plus a part on how all three are put together. We could put a redirect for "artillery spotting" right into that article. What do you think? I take it you're a historian, but perhaps, not formally trained in some of these things? I slaved through a friggin YEAR in the classroom at Quantico, VA and then out at the US Army's School of Artillery at Fort Sill, OK. I've been out of touch with some of this stuff as I retired in 98 with 22 years. But the good thing is that the Arty School puts out a GREAT technical mag on Artillery topics and since it's government property, I could draw heavly on it. Also, the same for the other areas. Another thing to consider is the evolution of the whole deal. From some little turk gunner with his little quadrant in a direct fire mode poundin the walls at Constantinople to the Napoleonic age, when things got better organizationally, to the US Civil war with its Federal (Yankee) iron rifled artillery kicking the crap out of Confederate brass canons with their defective fuses at Gettysburg, to the late 19th century when (yes, its hard to believe) the dang French (although they're quite clever in the engineering field historically, right?) invented a pneumatic recoil mechanism that allowed a cannon to recoil, recover from that and go back into almost the same position, allowing for much better control, to target acquisition by binoculars and balloons to locating the enemy by sound ranging, flash ranging and finally modern radar. So, its a fairly complex subject. But looking at your background in engineering, you'd really get off on it cause its a perfect melding of science, technology, mathematics (gunnery) and "violent execution" by artillery, the "King of Battle" as the "red legs" out at Fort Sill are called.

Lots of rambling here, but you get my point. A quite interesting topic. Another consideration. To do this right would really require extensive graphics - you know, parabolic arches and stuff and maps of the spotter, the target, the battery and how all that comes together in the Fire Direction Center (FDC). By they way, looper, with your great math/tech/science background you would have been like #1 in your class at Fort Sill in the Basic Officer Course (BOC) and the Field Artillery Cource (FAC). Seriously, you would have wadded thru that stuff. They take the math brainiacs and put them RIGHT in that FDC where they call the shots and the Army LOVES the HELL out of good gunnery officers. You have NO idea how much and how FAR these guys can go. I was more music/art than math/science, so I had to "make" myself study the stuff, but I got good at it, actually and became an FDC inspector for a time, double-checking for their accuracy.

So, let's discuss the breadth and scope of this stuff. By they way, I couldn't help but notice that you're kind of at the top of the wiki food chain and probably inhabiting some secret temple on Wiki Mt. Olympus. Just how did this stuff evolve as far as it has? Its really quite sophisticated, IMHO (well, Marines have a hard time being humble) anyway, how do people become editors, admins and the like?

I've written a fair number of articles, including some totally new stuff and my background in ancient civilizations, Latin, some Greek, etc, has been helpful - dude - even Wiki articles in Latin! Anyway, as a medieval (sp) dude stuck in the 21st Century, Wiki is right up my alley, and unlike too damned many people, I can actually write a coherent English paragraph and some Spanish and French too boot.

Do you dudes have like Wiki conventions where you wear like the wiki version of Star Trek costumes and have Wiki groupies and hangers on? I mean what's the extent of this wiki culture? Call me some time. You can email me at SimonATL (at) yahoo.com cause I'd like to take about 20 minutes to get my hands around this whole wiki universe. I've been too busy editing in English, Spanish and Latin to notice much of the background wiring in the walls and cultural/political stuff like that.

Hey, you're the featured article guy. Then you'll notice how much I've expanded the Theodore Roosevelt article, subject matter wise, much more interesting photos. Others like that Lee guy did the footnoting. I also added the entire section on his trip up the River of Doubt in 1913. And know what, because of all that work, and my writing an article on the Theodore Roosevelt (TRA) organization and on TR's great-great grandson, Tweed Roosevelt, I came to the attention of the Roosevelt family and they invited me to become a member of their Strategic Advisory Board to look at how IT and the Web can help them. So, you see, sometimes their are unintended consequences. Anyway, I'll help, but I've burned up so much time, I'll have to allot my hours, dig? thanks SimonATL 05:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to your comments on my talk page. Raul654 08:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

You have been busy! :)

What can I say, I love TR and "most" of the Roosevelts and Wikipedia.

What a "world" it is with links that take you everwhere! Found some great pics of James Dunwoody Bulloch and added an article on his brother, Irvine Bulloch, uncles of TR.

Been looking at Spanish articles, French and even some Russian and Arabic - Sergius Witte Russian plenipotentiary during the negotiations over the Russo-Japanese War. Amazing how some corrupt Latin American dictator who died in Paris while undergoing Syphilis treatment (in English) is described as having died while visiting his mother (in Spanish) what a hoot! SimonATL 19:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for JLC Chamberlain Edits

You're welcome. I try to tone down the hagiography that some Wikipedians apply to Chamberlain. Although he was an admirable man, The Movie has elevated him to godlike status among some. And he himself did little to discourage that sort of thing. Hal Jespersen 00:54, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chamberlain had his faults. He pretty much ignored most of his wife's intuitions and this led him to lose money on speculative ventures. He was certainly no fool, however. And a brave cuss to the end. I'm going to add a section on how he stood up to a mob on the steps of the Capital of Maine that wanted to physically rough up the legislators because they had passed a bill that really agravated the crowd. JLC had to literally appeal to 20th Maine old geezers who stood with him and faced down the mob. Guy had guts, no doubt about that. By the way, at his old Alma Mater, the students stagged a musical on his life according to an alumnus who used to work with me. PS - Good vocab word, Hagiography, as I love lots of that classical and later Greek stuff as in the Koine Greek from the Lords Prayer, "hagiasteetou ton onooma sou", "Hallowed (holy) is the name of you.". SimonATL 01:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bliss Knapp

Made some tweaks correcting the source and expanding the section slightly on the impersonalist interpretation of Rev 12, but think it stays within NPOV, and other details needed touchup anyway. Had heard the Rathvon reminiscence, it's definitely an interesting listen. If you get the chance, you might clarify earlier on the MMC article that it was basically resubsumed into the Board of Ed. Chris Rodgers 06:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, made a few more tweeks. The archives at The Mary Baker Eddy Library was wonderful help to get clear on some dates. I had a chance to check out the reported letter that was sent to teachers. I went through old letters from my class. I couldn't find a copy. There wasn't any mention of agreement or disagreement with Knapps theology. Do you have a copy of the letter as a source? Wasn't sure which part was being referred to with reference to the former archivist's letters. Did he write the six pages? Was it sent to churches? Was it sent to the Board? That part was unclear. Simplywater 06:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Democrat Party article

Hello Simon. Our old friend rjensen is up to his old tricks and has written an article called "Democrat Party" that dignifies this term. Wikipedia is considering deleting the Democrat Party (United States) article. I hope you will weigh in on the topic here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Democrat_Party_(United_States) I believe an article about this perjorative term doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Griot 00:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Theodore Roosevelt resignation letter

Simon, do you have a source for the letter you added as I was thinking of moving it to wikisource. Thanks AllanHainey 11:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - I'm unaware of what wikisource is about and for which is why I posted the letter here, because I'd never seen the entire item in any Roosevelt bio. The original letter is up for sale on Ebay for $8,499,99 and the URL is: http://cgi.ebay.com/THEODORE-ROOSEVELT-Letter-of-Resignation-NYPD_W0QQitemZ320000215450QQihZ011QQcategoryZ33776QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem SimonATL 11:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Theodore Roosevelt III

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions to the Theodore Roosevelt III article, but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! Ardric47 21:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as putting the section back, my opinion is that it might be better to rewrite it in your own words; the original text seemed a bit long-winded.

Regarding the "powers," most people are probably referring to administratorship. It's somewhat debatable how much they help one contribute content, because most of the extra tools are related to blocking users and deleting pages. "Promotions" to administrator are discussed at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. Hope this helps, Ardric47 02:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'm not an administrator, just an enthusiastic editor who gets involved in policy and procedure. So far, I haven't had any real reasons to want to be an admin. Ardric47 02:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How does one become an ADMIN?

Not sure why you've asked me as I'm not an admin on wikipedia. But I think all the details are at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship, just read it and add your name I think. AllanHainey 11:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:TR Great White Fleet Sales Kunsler.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TR Great White Fleet Sales Kunsler.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:07, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

TR Article

Hello,

I noticed that you have done some work on the Theodore Roosevelt Article. This is more of a technical question than anything. I tried to add the Category: Deaths by cardiovascular disease, but when it entered edit mode the Category section wasn't there. Perhaps you have more experience with this type of thing than I. Can you help?

Regards,

Michael David 13:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simon,

Thanks for the info on the layout of the TR article. I had just seen an excellent documentary called "Amazon Adventures" on The History Channel. A major section of it covered TR's horrendous trek through it. It covered his illnesses and his heart problems, and I was inspired to search him out in Wiki.

Be healthy,

Michael David 16:30, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simon,

I just visited your User Page. It taught me that you are someone I'd like to talk with. I'm going to take you up on your alternative method of communication and compose an E-mail. Be in touch again soon.

Michael David 16:53, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:TR Great White Fleet Sales Kunsler.jpg)

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:TR Great White Fleet Sales Kunsler.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. 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.

If you have uploaded other fair use 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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BrownCow  (how now?) 21:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:TR Great White Fleet Sales Kuntsler.jpg)

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:TR Great White Fleet Sales Kuntsler.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. 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.

If you have uploaded other fair use 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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BigDT 23:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Pilate-inscription 03.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Pilate-inscription 03.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fred-Chess 12:26, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German General Staff

Your contributions to this article are welcome, but in my opinion could do with being written in a less specialised form of English, and with more references.

With regard to your introduction:

"... humil[i]ating battlefield defeats of the Prussian Army at the hands of Austria and France in the 17th and 18th Centuries" ; Prussia did not exist as a separate nation in the 17th Century.

"While a succession of brilliant kings starting with Frederich the Great ..."; Frederick's successors were Frederick William II of Prussia, who was sensual and pleasure-loving, Frederick William III of Prussia, who was vacillating and irresolute, and Frederick William IV of Prussia, who went mad and abdicated. William I of Prussia came to the throne in the mid-19th century, long after Scharnhorst's and Gneisenau's reforms were in place.

I meant to refer to Frederick I of Prussia, King "in" Prussia not Frederick the Great - glad you caught that.

"...institutionalize the military talent found in the talented German generals that had brought martial glory to Prussia" ; a tautology. Also, "institutionalize" has overtones in British english of being committed to the care of social services, or even a lunatic asylum !(With all due respect to T.N. Dupuy, the article must be written so as to be interesting to and comprehensible by the non-specialist reader.) HLGallon 20:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your latest comments on my user space. A Tautology is saying the same thing twice in different words. Perhaps, I used the wrong phrase here by this strict definition, but "the military talent found in the talented German generals" does seem to hit the nail over the head unnecessarily often. On your second point, I prefer to put comments which might be taken as a criticism of style or research, in users' private discussion pages (as we are doing here) rather than in the article's discussion section, to avoid making any arguments too public. HLGallon 02:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Once again thank you for your comments on my talk page. I must also apologise for what must now seem pedantic and censorious. Your own background makes you better qualified than many contributors on the subject of the German General Staff (incidentally, I too was once a junior officer in the British Territorial Army), and perhaps you could expand and improve the last paragraphs, which are starting to look a bit short compared with the rest of the article. Incidentally, I have been squelched many times by the Wiki community where my own research has been inadequate or my phrasing has been imprecise or esoteric. HLGallon 18:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Clay_s_jenkinson.jpg listed for deletion

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Clay_s_jenkinson.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it, but use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 09:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Halakha

Please see Talk:Halakha for a response to your question on accent. In the future, please bring up concerns on the talk page. Thanks, HKT^Talk 22:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:TR Great White Fleet Sales Kunstler.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:TR Great White Fleet Sales Kunstler.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Donald Albury 00:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do not remove the {{PUIdisputed}} tag from the image page. The image has been listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images, and you may comment there. Please be aware that inappropriately removing tags such as {{PUIdisputed}} may be regarded as vandalism. Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policies and guidelines before you inadvertantly get into trouble. -- Donald Albury 03:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Clay s jenkinson.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Clay s jenkinson.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 22:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:TR Great White TRA right image.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:TR Great White TRA right image.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 17:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:TR Great White Fleet Sails.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:TR Great White Fleet Sails.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 17:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Renehan Perseus.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Renehan Perseus.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:785px-Arty Call for Fire 1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:785px-Arty Call for Fire 1.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Renehan Perseus.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Renehan Perseus.jpg for use in the Edward Renehan article. 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 '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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:TR_Great_White_FleetSails.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:TR_Great_White_FleetSails.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 23:34, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Universal-smithSS1500.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Universal-smithSS1500.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 23:29, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pilate

I have moved your contribution to Historicity of Jesus regarding Pilate to Talk:Pontius Pilate. The historicity article is already on the long side, and it seems rather off topic to discuss the historicity of someone who isn't Jesus. Maybe if there was an article New Testament and history or Historicity of the Gospels or something similar, this could fit. But I think including this info at the Pontius Pilate article is best for now. I hope you understand. Thanks.-Andrew c ^[talk] 02:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I like what you did to Historical Jesus (for the most part). My main issue is that we cannot cite wikipedia as a source. Do we have a source that says Pilate's historicity was disputed before the 1961 discovery (I don't doubt it does, but in order to be verifiable, we need a source)? I couldn't find one cited at the Pilate article, and my own small bit of research didn't help. Meier's A Marginal Jew mentions the inscription 3 times, but doesn't outright say what the sentence you added says (page 185 is the closest, but it is talking about historical certainty). So for now, I left a fact tag on the sentence (and shorted the section heading). Thanks for your work so far, and hopefully this minor gripe of mine can be cleared up. -Andrew c ^[talk] 16:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:TR At his desk in 1902.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:05h 1902.jpg. The copy called Image:05h 1902.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 19:45, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania in Atlanta!

Hi! I noticed your involvement on U.S. South-related articles, categories and WikiProjects, and I wanted to let you know about a bid we're formulating to get next year's Wikimania held in Atlanta! If you would like to help, be sure to sign your name to the "In Atlanta" section of the Southeast team portion of the bid if you're in town, or to the "Outside Atlanta" section if you still want to help but don't live in the city or the suburbs. If you would like to contribute more, please write on my talk page, the talk page of the bid, or join us at the #wikimania-atlanta IRC chat on freenode.org. Have a great day!

P.S. While this is a template for maximum efficiency, I would appreciate a note on my talk page so I know you got the message, and what you think. This is time-sensitive, so your urgent cooperation is appreciated. :) Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 19:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I stumbled upon an article you edited on Eleanor Roosevelt's grandmother. I saw the screen name said "ATL" and put two and two together. As far as the "editor" bit, I don't understand what you mean by that. You can send me an e-mail with any questions you may have about the bid through "e-mail this user" and I will respond to it tonight. I'll edit your email out of my page now. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 19:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Puller Fortunate Son Cover.JPG)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:08, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:WMRathvonLYP5892.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:WMRathvonLYP5892.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rette tast 14:48, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

Regarding [3]: His edit clearly wasn't "vandalism." Please be civil. -- RG ² 16:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:TR_Rossin.jpg

I have tagged Image:TR_Rossin.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. If this image is being used as a link target instead of displayed inline, please add {{not orphan}} to the image description page to prevent it being accidentally marked as orphaned again. -- RG ² 06:43, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Home page edit

Hello SimonATL. Inquiry. I know many that many of the current Wikipedia edits are either minor or are reverts of vandalism but (1) what brought you to my home page? an interest in mathematics? and (2) why presumptuously edit a word therein? Larry R. Holmgren 18:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes your amazing talent for math. But I didn't have the time to read your English qualifications. Just thought the edit would help clarify. Which it did and you'll notice that I clearly indicated so in my explanation. No issues. We can ALL (myself included) express ourself more clearly. Go ahead and improve a word or 2 on my page and I'll say THANK YOU. SimonATL 22:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Null is a polymath who challenged the leading paradigms and institutional forces in medicine (cancer, nutrition, AIDS, Gulf War Syndrome, et. al.), psychiatry, and health. That is why he has so many critics. I am interested but not talented in math. Thank you for you candid response. Larry R. Holmgren 03:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

George Galloway

Simon, I removed your changes. What was it you were trying to do? Maybe I can help you. --John 00:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Just what are BOTs and how do they work

I have responded to your query on ClueBot's talk page. -- Cobi^(t|c|b|cn) 02:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gettysburg Address FAR

Gettysburg Address has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. KnightLago (talk) 16:05, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 2007

Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Cipriano Castro. 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. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Blueboy 96 18:11, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Tweed_Roosevelt_defiance_ohio.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Tweed_Roosevelt_defiance_ohio.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use 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. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use 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, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 13:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Vivien-Leigh publicity still Gone-with-the-Wind.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 19:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Clay s jenkinson2.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Clay s jenkinson2.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. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

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. Rossrs (talk) 11:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your Grant question on the ACW page...

Normally we avoid speculation about the subject itself on an articles talk page, which is why I'm responding to it on your talk page. I would disagree that Grant was necessary for the end of the war to come about, and generally feel that the focus on military tactics is one of the reasons why people are surprised that the Union, which generally lacked clear tactical victories, won so resoundingly in the war. There were simply too many structural problems within the Confederacy to effect the outcome of the war; by 1863 Confederate supply lines, labor, and morale were in free fall. Desertion was rampant, lack of exchange for vital war supplies nonexistent, the collapse of slavery as slaves either ran for it, or joined the Army (which in turn led to the inability to grow food or the cotton necessary to maintain the war physically and financially). The greatest tactical battle plans in the world matter little if your soldiers ar ehungry, have no shoes, and have holes in their shirts. SiberioS (talk) 03:29, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theodore Roosevelt FAR

Theodore Roosevelt has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Roosevelt

I just created the Philip Roosevelt page. If any of those books mentions any interesting tidbits about him, feel free to improve his article. It will be on the main page as part of the WP:DYK feature over the upcoming weekend.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No relation. Just a wikipedian trying to do the right thing. Feel free to help the Philip Roosevelt disambiguation page if you know of others. Even add redlinks. Pretty much any Philip relative should at least be on that page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Kermit_and_Ted_roosevelt.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Kermit_and_Ted_roosevelt.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. howcheng {chat} 16:57, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Kermit_roosevelt_20s.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Kermit_roosevelt_20s.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. howcheng {chat} 17:56, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Kermit roosevelt 1926.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Kermit roosevelt 1926.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 06:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Library of Congress images

Hi, just a note about images you get from the Library of Congress. On the "Bibliographic Information" page, there's usually a permanent URL you can use, so for that Kermit Roosevelt pic you uploaded yesterday, that would be http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/npcc.27526 -- the URL that you copied from your browser is only a temporary one and doesn't work anymore. Thanks! howcheng {chat} 16:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Also, would you mind not saving your JPEG images at such a low resolution? It introduces a lot of compression artifacts. I will get the 25MB TIFF and crop it like you have so we have a nice large image to use for that article.

Image:Kermit_Kim_roosevelt.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Kermit_Kim_roosevelt.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. howcheng {chat} 17:06, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Poppy Harlow

A tag has been placed on Poppy Harlow 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 notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance 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 a copy be emailed to you. --The Firewall 16:55, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Theodore Roosevelt

Although your intentions may be good, please do not remove huge segments of an article without providing an explanation. --Jyngyr (talk) 00:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, that was a mistake and I was in the process of fixing it. Thanks for correcting that! SimonATL (talk) 00:58, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :)--Jyngyr (talk) 00:59, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Friendly Response To Your Note

Hello SimonATL -

In response to your comments on my Talk page responding to my edits of the LBH article - please allow me to clarify.

I've done some of the writing, a lot of the re-writing, and quite a bit of the guarding of this article over the last 2 1/2 years - if you check the talk page (bottom half) you'll see some of the extensive discussions I've had with editors who tried to bend the article in one way or the other [mainly to either pro-Custer/anti-Reno|Benteen or vice versa, or to a non-historical glorification/demonization of one side or the other].

Now, I've always enjoyed your edits and have found them insightful and constructive. Correcting typos is just a minor thing - but I think you've misunderstood my edit summary slightly. My two edits to your content were first, putting a citation needed tag after your comment that students of the battle criticize Reno to this day for putting the Ree scouts on the left flank.

That was not the POV I alluded to. I'm sure that that statement can be substantiated from any of a number of good sources. I put the tag there because of the fact that this article was first de-listed as a good article and later a second time denied that status precisely because of a lack of citation for significant points, of which this would be one.

My POV language comment was intended for this part that I took out: - "his body was surrounded by senior officer and enlisted members of his command including his 1st Sergeant and others who chose not to flee, but to fight to the end with their much loved leader."

As the rest of your edits indicate, and as I have had to fight tooth and nail to preserve in the article, we have no accurate, certain way of knowing what happened to anyone who died in Custer's command. There is another editor and published analysis by experts that maintain that the whole Custer fight was a disastrous rout that was over in 20 minutes with no organized resistance - and there are Lakota accounts that say so. But Lakota accounts are terribly contradictory, and though we may speculate that Keogh was wounded and that his men on the ridge refused to abandon him - there are fifty other scenarios equally possible, including that they were completely surrounded and unable to flee. Your edit attributes an action that we cannot prove to a motive that we have know certain way of knowing.

I'm quite a Keogh fan myself and believe that this fascinating character did in fact keep his men in disciplined order to the last. But I can't prove that, and no one can, much less why his men stayed in apparently good order. Your edits remain completely viable without the one removed phrase.

Two final points. I have indeed walked all of these two battlefields completely twice, and I agree that no amount of reading about the battle informs a student of it as much as actually being there and seeing the perspectives that the combatants saw.

Second - just for readability, this paragraph needs to be broken up. It has become just one massive block of print and needs a little space at a couple of points. IMHO.

I look forward to further additions from you to the article. Sensei48 (talk) 03:55, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problems LBH

Helo SimonATL -

I appreciate the enthusiasm and intelligence of your supported and referenced edits to LBH. There are, though, several significant problems with some aspects of them. I too busy right now at work to put the kind of time into working with the article that I like, but there are two that I can mention immediately.

a) the legend has disappeared from the animated map, due to re-sizing and losing the caption. The captions are absolutely necessary for the general reader's understanding of this excellent map. Who is A? C? C? D? These must be identified below the map or its usefulness is mitigated - and it is a clearer, easier to understand resource than the non-animated older map posted opposite it - note that the animated map depicts the railroad there now, properly orienting battlefield visitors.

The headings for each section - some of which do serve the purpose of breaking up the article, but others of which are superfluous - are uniformly much too long. Wiki guidelines require economy of words in these headings and sub-headings - three or four words at most and in no case complete sentences. Look, for example, at the infobox and headings for Sitting Bull. Three, four, or five words per heading are optimal. I'm going to change the section after "Prelude to Battle" (original title and better than what is there now) as an example. I'm sure that this can be done and equally sure that unless we change these the article will never be in line with the rest of Wikipedia and will never achieve good article WP:GA status. Sensei48 (talk) 04:54, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also - phrases like "fatal assumptions" will be deemed POV. Sensei48 (talk) 04:57, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More - I have finally read that abovementioned section and am distressed at the amount of re-writing and style (in addition to typos and grammar problems). Wiki guidelines and solid historical writing are important - questions, rhetorical and otherwise, anre not appropriate to this kind of writing, note are notations like "etc." abbreviating the message from GAC and Cooke - how would anyone not already versed in the battle know what you mean? I'm afraid you are in a well-intended way creating the necessity of major rewrites of your edits. Sensei48 (talk) 05:03, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Simon - Thanks for your extended response! Sorry - I didn't mean for my comments above to appear as emotional - I should not have said "distressed" - wrong word. I enjoy most of your additions to the article - you are a fine writer with the same tendency to typos that I have.

My concern is that in improving the article we keep it conistent with Wiki guidelines on things like chapter headings and language - of course i agree with the idea that GAC's assumptions were "ftal" - but if you look acros a broad spectrum of Wiki articles, you won't find headings phrased that way. Like you, I care a lot about this article and want it to be recognized as a "good article" and hance would like to follow the Wiki sty;e as much as possible. More soon!

Sensei48 (talk) 18:21, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Best Wishes For 2009!

Hello to you Simon, and best wishes for the New Year! It's been a pleasure working on LBH with you, and your extensive knowledge of the battle site continues to be a wonderful asset to the development of the article. Doktorschley is indeed a fine writer and a committed student of the battle; he and I sometimes disagree on just how much can be said objectively about GAC's many failings and how "balanced" the article needs to be. That reminds me - have we ever located a source that we could use to substantiate the likelihood of Keogh's men protecting him due to loyalty? I know his popularity with his men is out there - maybe in Jeffrey Wert's book, or Evan Connell's. You did a great job with the bullet wound and the corresponding wound on Comanche! I'll let you know if I find anything. Regards, Sensei48 (talk) 01:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Simon - A wonderful commentary from you on LBH on my talk page! I really like your pointed analysis of why GAC made the decisions/"mistakes" that he did - sleep deprivation and so on. I myself have always favored the notion that he didn't make "mistakes" as commonly understood, but rather as you intimate encountered a "perfect storm" of Indian moves exactly countering is own. GAC's impetuous nature and aggressive style did not serve him well that day - but - the strategy had worked well at Washita, and while it's always seemed to me that Reno panicked and while I don't think Benteen dawdled intentionally to put Custer in harm's way (after all, B. had no animus toward the 200 or so troopers who dies with GAC) - I think it likely that an aggressive counter attck from the Indians' flank by Reno/Benteen might well have changed the outcome of the battle. Can't put that in the article, though, because it's POV. It galls me a bit that there is a genuine attempt to discredit GAC in a non-objective way in the article, but that's the Wiki process at work. Someone should fund you and NPS for the battlefield vision survey - when I've been at the Reno-Benteen field, it's been hot summer days like 6/25/1876 and the heat haze tends to obscure Lat Stand Hill - though on a clear day it would be visible and action there perceivable with field glasses. Given the fact that the forensic archaeology is all but complete, your survey would be the next step in enhancing our understanding of the battle. Regards Sensei48 (talk) 07:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again SimonATL - Thanks for your note on my Talk page and for your response to User 58 on LBH Talk. It's a pleasure for me personally to see the amount of real-world experience in the military that you bring to your writing here, in addition to your previously-discussed familiarity with the battlefields. It's gotten interesting over on the LBH Talk page - someone from the Wikipedia Military history project has gotten involved. I look forward to doing more constructive work on the article with you. Regards Sensei48 (talk) 01:59, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Xmas

Before you perform further unconstructive major surgery on that article, it would be nice if you would look at Talk:Xmas and peruse the points raised in the last section there. AnonMoos (talk) 03:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was certainly a time (though it was least a generation before 1960, in the United States anyway), when members of a relatively small social elite were likely to know the classical languages, while those in other social classes were likely to defer in such matters to members of the upper classes. However, the percentage of people in the total population who knew Greek and Latin was not necessarily hugely greater than what it is today. And the purpose of the "Xmas" article is really not to serve as a repository for your personal ruminations and musings about the decline of Classical education, even if they were 100% factually and historically correct (which they weren't). I boiled down your observations to a single subordinate clause at the beginning of the Xmas#History section, which is about all that's strictly relevant to the article.

Yes, I know some Latin and Greek. I am not an Israeli. My interest in the "Shield of the Trinity" is that: 1) It's 800 years old. 2) It's still useful in providing some basic graspable visualization of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity separate from highily abstruse metaphysical-philosophical terminology. AnonMoos (talk) 13:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Shield of the Trinity" Quite facinating. I'm going to investigate. Thanks. SimonATL (talk) 23:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Impersonation

Probably the best thing for you to do is to report "Keith Simon" as a case of impersonation at WP:ANI. If it's deemed an inappropriate user name the impersonator can be blocked. - Nunh-huh 01:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tweed Roosevelt

This is kind of trivial, but I'm curious to know how he pronounces his last name. FDR said it as "ROZE-uh-velt" or "ROZE-uh-vult", and I've read that TR pronounced it more like "ROOZ-velt". So I just wonder how TR's great-grandson says it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so pretty much everyone says it the FDR way. Next question: Are there any existing recordings of TR's voice, and if so, did he say his own name on any of them? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 19:22, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much for the site info. I'm debating whether to join Yahoo or not. I wonder if you can tell me how TR said his last name? I do have a vague recollection of hearing his voice (or allegedly his voice) on some recording, decades ago. It sounded fairly similar to FDR's delivery, as I recall. So I wonder if it was for real or not. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:45, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tweed pronounces it "ROZE-uh-velt."

According to the Roosevelt Cylopedia, in a letter written to Rev. William W. Moir on October 10, 1898.) Roosevelt indicated, "As for my name, it is pronounced as if it was spelled "Rosavelt." That is in three syllables. The first syllable as if it was "Rose." See http://www.theodoreroosevelt.org/TR%20Web%20Book/TR_CD_to_HTML571.html SimonATL (talk) 03:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so the bottom line is that Franklin and Theodore pronounced their last names essentially the same way. Thank you! And since I don't have access to those recordings, would you say that Teddy's delivery, i.e. the general way he talks, is in any way similar to Franklin's? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:16, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Found that Theodore Roosevelt audio I was telling you about

OK - I located an excellent source for TR's "Standard Oil Abyssinian Treatment" Speech.

The speech was recorded on 4 disks. 2 of those disks are on Rhapsody.com at http://www.rhapsody.com/theodore-roosevelt One part is here: 2. http://www.rhapsody.com/player?type=track&id=tra.21355962&remote=false&page=&pageregion=&guid=&from=&hasrhapx=false&__pcode= contains the and let me know what you think. Both FDR and TR, according to a Roosevelt Family history friend of mine, Linda Milano spoke with a NY Knickerbocker accent that was common to NY's upper classes. You can really hear an trace of England there too. Here is pronounced HE-arh, for example. This audio IS the finest sample we have of TR giving a public speech as opposed to merely reading from a manuscript. You'll also detect traces of his famous falsetto. Notice how it rises when he says, "Republican Parteeeeeee." YOU can tell ME what how YOU think FDR and TR's voice compare. FDR had a deeper baratone resonance in later years.

Short segment at:

http://www.authentichistory.com/1900s/1912election/19120922_Theodore_Roosevelt-Abyssinian_Treatment_of_Standard_Oil.html SimonATL (talk) 17:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Very high quality recording for that era. Certainly traces of the same intonation as FDR, but I don't think they would be confused with each other. In any case - TR, quite a man. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 03:38, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Margaret_Mitchell_3.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Margaret_Mitchell_3.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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. 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, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:51, 22 April 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 11:51, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did Poppy Harlow leave CNN?

I haven't seen her in the past couple of weeks, and from what I could find to update the article you made, it looks like she's left them. Do you know of any source to help confirm this? ThanksOpenskye (talk) 22:37, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. I saw her again this morning. Good to have her back.Openskye (talk) 18:05, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:Frank Buckles at 106.jpg

File:Frank Buckles at 106.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Frank Buckles at 106.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Frank Buckles at 106.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:16, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:TR San Juan Hill 1898.jpg is now available as Commons:File:TR San Juan Hill 1898.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:29, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:AliceRoosevelt 1902.jpg is now available as Commons:File:AliceRoosevelt 1902.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:02, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:AliceRoosevelt FoldedArms Gibson Girl.jpg is now available as Commons:File:AliceRoosevelt FoldedArms Gibson Girl.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:04, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:AliceRoosevelt chair.jpg is now available as Commons:File:AliceRoosevelt chair.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:05, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Teddy Roosevelt portrait.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Teddy Roosevelt portrait.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

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 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. JaGa^talk 22:03, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello SimonATL! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 295 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Henry C. Boren - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Serge Ricard - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 23:05, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

JD Edwards

Hi Simon, I was wondering where you found the information you added in September 2007 to the JD Edwards artcle. It looks like it's all good information, but it does need to be cited. Can you help? prhartcom (talk) 19:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just realized you also added this link to the article back then, this must be it: McVaney.pdf prhartcom (talk) 19:44, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:TR the Light Has Gone Out.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:TR the Light Has Gone Out.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 created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:42, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Expert review

Hello there,

given the interest you expressed in strategy:Proposal:Expert review, I wanted to bring m:Expert review to your attention. At this point, it captures the current efforts in this area. There are some obvious ways in which you could help:

1) There's an existing proof-of-concept JavaScript displaying expert reviews for articles for which they are available. That script could be significantly improved, and potentially be promoted to gadget status.

2) We need to develop the product specifications for what expert review in Wikipedia should look like (starting with the simplest implementation that makes sense). The Meta page has some initial draft notes, but mock-ups, thoughts and additional documentation would be much appreciated.

3) We should think about what the most effective and scalable ways are to mobilize large groups of experts to participate in review processes, and to validate their credentials. There is an opportunity right now with the APS, which has just launched a Wikipedia initiative, and is willing to ask its 20,000 members to help with expert assessments. But we should think about the longer term as well.

Your participation in these and other areas would be much appreciated. Hope to see you on Meta,--Eloquence * 01:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Joe Wiegand

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 Joe Wiegand 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.

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. Bped1985 (talk) 03:05, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Joe Wiegand

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 Joe Wiegand 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.

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," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). 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. 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. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joe Wiegand for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joe Wiegand 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/Joe Wiegand 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. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:34, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-Free rationale for File:Leonard J Fick.jpg

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

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Tra-seal.jpg

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

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Courcelles 01:50, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Harold Schafer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ed (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:42, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link in article '1976 Tehran UFO incident'

Hi. The article '1976 Tehran UFO incident' has a dead link that could not be repaired automatically. Can you help fix it?

Dead: http://www.wpbf.com/video/14573588/index.html

You added this in November 2007.
The bot checked The Wayback Machine and WebCite but couldn't find a suitable replacement.

This link is marked with {{Dead link}} in the article. Please take a look at that article and fix what you can. Thank you!

PS- you can opt-out of these notifications by adding {{Bots|deny=BlevintronBot}} to your user page or user talk page. BlevintronBot (talk) 23:55, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Woodbury Kane, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Colt and San Juan Hill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:14, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Theodore Roosevelt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Camino Real (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:56, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources required

Hello, I reverted your recent edits to Frank Marshall Davis as they didnt seem to be supported by reliable third party sources with a reputation for fact checking and accuracy and presenting content in a neutral point of view. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:12, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not insert fringe or undue weight content into articles, as you did to Frank Marshall Davis. An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Please use the article's talk page to discuss the material and its appropriate weight within the article. Thank you. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While Kegor may have gotten a PhD, he did not parlay his degree into becoming known for being a great historical researcher with a reputation for fact checking and accuracy; he went to the realm of political hackery and as such his work is essentially worthless as a reliable source in wikipedia. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RedPen - I am ordering Kegor's book. It remains to be seen just how "worthless" this book is as a "reliable source" for Wikipedia. Will let you know what I find. SimonATL (talk) 16:47, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, SimonATL. You have new messages at Glaucus's talk page.
Message added 20:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Glaucus (talk) 20:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, SimonATL. You have new messages at Glaucus's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:37, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Charles Lollar, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Washington State and NA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kermit Roosevelt Amazon Expedition 1913.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

File:Kermit Roosevelt Amazon Expedition 1913.jpg

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 08:29, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Theodore Roosevelt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page East Coast (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:25, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Charles Lollar for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charles Lollar 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/Charles Lollar 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. Tiller54 (talk) 19:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited USS Newport (LST-1179), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shellback (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Charles Lollar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 8 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:785px-Arty Call for Fire 1.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:11, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, SimonATL. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 02:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mark Schulman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foreigner (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:13, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James Monroe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Brooklyn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Kanhoji Angre may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

who fought with Angre would later claim that he was nothing but a troublesome pirate or [privateer]]. In so doing they deliberately and conveniently forgot that he had been appointed an admiral in

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:17, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Kazoku may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

# {{nihongo|[[Count]]|伯爵|hakusha

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:55, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited George G. McMurtry, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alexander Brodie. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:785px-Arty Call for Fire 1.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:785px-Arty Call for Fire 1.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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:49, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:44, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:19, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw this, FWiW Bzuk and thanks for the espression! What article interests do we have in common? SimonATL 23:23, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

April 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ivanhoe may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

trial and [[crucifixion]]; hence the name [[Palm Sunday]]). Also returning from the [[Holy Land]]) that same night, Isaac of [[York]], a Jewish moneylender, seeks refuge at Rotherwood. Following
/ref>), and the 1991 box-office success ''[[Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves]]'' with Kevin Costner). There is also the [[Mel Brooks]] spoof, [[Robin Hood: Men in Tights]]. In most versions of Robin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:10, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, SimonATL. 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]

Proposed deletion of Joe Wiegand

The article Joe Wiegand has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't seem notable outside of a very narrow domain--article reads like an advertisement or CV.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:21, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joe Wiegand for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joe Wiegand 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/Joe Wiegand (2nd nomination) 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. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:51, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: Joe Wiegand

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Joe Wiegand, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images from either web sites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from here, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

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 license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Joe Wiegand and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Joe Wiegand, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If you hold the copyright to the work: 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 Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Joe Wiegand. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Joe Wiegand with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Joe Wiegand saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! — Diannaa (talk) 14:02, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, SimonATL. 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, SimonATL. 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]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 22:41, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Block

You've been blocked from editing for 36 hours due to violating the 3 revert rule. Please be more careful in the future. El_C 23:03, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bliss Knapp article

Hi Simon - you wrote most of the Bliss Knapp article, which is substantive and well written. But it is almost totally lacking references! Would you be able to go back and add some references? 68.9.181.144 (talk) 18:06, 17 August 2020 (UTC) 68.9.181.144 (talk) 18:06, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I have located a biography on Knapp called "Bliss Knapp - Christian Scientist" and am reviewing the article to add references to that book and a couple others. thanks 01:23, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Archie Roosevelt Photographs Quentin Roosevelt 1902.jpg

The file File:Archie Roosevelt Photographs Quentin Roosevelt 1902.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, low-resolution, and gigantic caption makes it unsuitable; underlying image is available at File:Archie Roosevelt photographing Quentin Roosevelt outdoors LCCN98506452.jpg

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Vahurzpu (talk) 02:17, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021

Your edit to Iraqi Air Force has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 14:14, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

English

I never visited my user page and just found out you directly edited it. Why didn't you edit my talk page?

I know I'm bad at English but I want to contribute to Wikipedia. Sorry for my "full of grammatical mistakes" contribution. MRFazry (talk) 18:11, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Eleanor Roosevelt at 15.jpg

The file File:Eleanor Roosevelt at 15.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, superseded by File:Eleanor Roosevelt in school portrait - NARA - 197245.jpg.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:02, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Eleanor Roosevelt at 18.jpg

The file File:Eleanor Roosevelt at 18.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, superseded by File:Eleanor Roosevelt in her coming out portrait taken in New York City - NARA - 196859.jpg.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:03, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Eleanor Alice Roosevelt Churchill wife 1944.gif

The file File:Eleanor Alice Roosevelt Churchill wife 1944.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, superseded by File:Eleanor Roosevelt, Princess Alice, and Mrs. Winston Churchill at Quebec, Canada for conference - NARA - 196993.jpg.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:04, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:TR Rough Rider 1.jpg

The file File:TR Rough Rider 1.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, superseded by File:Theodore Roosevelt in military uniform, 1898.jpg.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 02:37, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mark Schulman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foreigner. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Tweed Roosevelt

The article Tweed Roosevelt has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies. Sources are weak, there's very little to them and even less about article subject.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Elttaruuu (talk) 05:59, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Elttaruuu I have added more info & references and will continue on this track. thanks SimonATL 03:40, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:39, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SNUGGUMS Unfortunately the photos are not placing correctly on the Wikipedia page despite repepeated attempts. Both the Lincoln funeral procession and one other photo are not placing correctly. help if you can. thanks SimonATL 04:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SNUGGUMS I'll fill out the edit summary section going FWD. SimonATL 04:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 04:28, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SNUGGUMS I noted the US Naval Institute Article on TR's Naval theories predating Mahan's Seapower Book. Please look at the related footnote. SimonATL 04:55, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My concerns on original research pertain to this where you added an unsupported number for 2023 inflation. We can't just insert anything we like and it's better to keep the conversion template in place for such things. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 05:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Custom signature fix needed

Hi there! You have a custom signature set in your account preferences. Changes to Wikipedia's software have made your current custom signature invalid.

The problem: Your signature contains a syntax error or obsolete HTML tags.

The solutions: You can reset your signature to the default, you can fix your signature, or you can do nothing.

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.
Click the blue "Save" button at the bottom of the page. (Do not click the red "Restore all default settings" button, which 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.
Click the Learn more button next to the error to learn how to fix the error.
Update your signature to fix the error.
Click Save to update to your newly fixed signature.

Solution 3: Do nothing:

In accordance with a recent request for comment, all invalid signatures will be changed to the default, which looks like "Example (talk)", one month from now.

If you have followed these instructions and still want help, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Signatures. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 20

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited J. Pat O'Malley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charlestown.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hopewell, New Jersey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native Americans.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Leonard Wood, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of San Juan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:29, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AIRTENSE

In regards to this edit, per WP:AIRTENSE, an aircraft is referred to in the present tense if at least one example is known to exist, including any that are not airworthy (though wrecks are almost always excluded). - ZLEA _T\^C 00:02, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ZLEA Thanks SimonATL (talk) 18:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]