User talk:Terryrandell

Questions

I noticed that you changed the Pasadena link to go back to the disambiguation page instead of to the main instance of the word "Pasadena", which is in California. If you go to the page titled "Pasadena" and click on "What Links Here", you'll notice that there are literally hundreds of links that now go to a disambiguation page instead of to the intended target: Pasadena California. In cases where the ambiguous word has two or more potential meanings that are of equal weight, for example Springfield, or Portland, it is generally more acceptable to have the singular word search go to a disamb. However, and I don't mean this as a slight in any way towards Pasadena, Newfoundland (or Florida, Maryland, Australia, or Missouri for that matter), but when someone types "Pasadena" into the wikisearch, they are almost certainly statistically trying to locate an article about Pasadena California. By the same logic, when someone is typing an article or adding wikilinks to "Pasadena", it is almost certainly meant for California, which is why having it set up the way you have it creates a huge list of "links to disambiguation pages", which then ends up in my (and several other editors) laps at the Disambiguation pages with links project. You'll notice that the California article does have a hatnote at the top to link people back to the disam page if, for some reason, they were looking for "Pasadena, Newfoundland" and only typed "Pasadena" (which you have to admit, is quite unlikely). Your comments are more than welcome either here or on my talk page. As a reference for my logic here, I've copied this from WP:Disambiguation:

When there is a well known primary meaning for a term or phrase, much more used than any other (this may be indicated by a majority of links in existing articles or by consensus of the editors of those articles that it will be significantly more commonly searched for and read than other meanings), then that topic may be used for the title of the main article, with a disambiguation link at the top. If there's a disambiguation page, it should link back to the primary topic

.

Thanks and happy editing, Keeper | 76 15:43, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Keeper has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for helping me handle the Pasadena situation with civility. The change you made to your own edit, as well as the nice note on my talkpage, is immesasurably appreciated after a long day of vandal fighting, AfDs, and Disambiguating. Have a good day! Keeper | 76 01:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commons Photos

I have just spend one weeks vacation on the west coast of Newfoundland and photographed quite a bit of the small coastal towns, post offices, lakes and Long Range Mountains. I have started adding the photos to the article List of communities in Newfoundland and Labrador, you can link there from our Wiki article by the same name. I will be adding more later and feel free to use them while expanding the communities articles WayneRay 14:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Photos link

HI, if you go to List of communities in Newfoundland and Labrador here on wikipedia there is a link to photos on the wiki commons site by the same name. You can also go to my website and link on them as well wayneray.ca/archives/ WayneRay (talk) 15:35, 20 November 2007 (UTC)WayneRay[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Gcsucfslocal36 logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Gcsucfslocal36 logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Grenfell College Student Union

The article Grenfell College Student Union has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Me-123567-Me (talk) 23:55, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to hear about your disappointment, but the student union wasn't notable, and failed to cite sources. Me-123567-Me (talk) 20:35, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Grenfell College Student Union for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Grenfell College Student Union, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grenfell College Student Union until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:46, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your AfD argument

Your argument at the discussion at Articles for Deletion on the GCSU will be accorded little to no weight as you've presented the argument. This is not a personality thing, this is simply a reflection of the fact that deletion arguments are judged by existing Wikipedia policy. The essential policy you need to look at is called the general notability guideline, it can be found at WP:GNG. It is linked in the nomination of the article, and is also linked in notices at the top of the article. Roughly speaking, to save the article, you will need to reference the article by adding multiple, reliable sources of information, independent from the union (e.g., books, magazines, newspaper reports, etc.) that provide substantial coverage about the union itself, that is the type of argument that will save the GCSU article. I'm sorry if that hurdle seems too large, and I'm not trying to argue with you, but I at least wanted you to understand the policies that are being debated here, and why your comment, the way it's presented, it unlikely to win the day. All the best, --j⚛e decker ^talk 23:18, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Terryrandell! The article was deleted before I had a chance to respond to your point at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grenfell College Student Union that "student unions ought to have pages" and "If the decision is made to delete this student union page, why bother having a page on any student union website?" That's a good question and deserves an answer. The answer is that, like pretty much everything else here, student unions are evaluated on a case-by-case basis. If the student union has a lot of independent sourcing (and some do), then it is notable and it has a page here. If it is not notable according to the WP rule of significant coverage by independent sources, then it does not get an article. This will result in some student unions having pages and some not - just as some companies have a page and some don't, or some actors have a page and some don't. I just wanted you to understand that these issues are rarely judged according to what category of thing we are talking about, but are rated individually, with some members of the category making the cut and some not. Please do continue to edit at Wikipedia, and you'll catch on how it works! --MelanieN (talk) 01:32, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Gcsucfslocal36small logo.png

Thanks for uploading File:Gcsucfslocal36small logo.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

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

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Me-123567-Me (talk) 01:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:CentralPNG.PNG 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) 14:12, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another one of your uploads, File:Cendiv5cb-hum-whitbayPNGA.PNG, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:11, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another one of your uploads, File:Chamber.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:23, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New 10,000 Challenge for Canada

Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/The 10,000 Challenge is up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge for the UK which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. If you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Canada like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1600 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for Canada but fuelled by a contest such as The North America Destubathon to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. I would like some support from Canadian wikipedians here to get the Challenge off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile! Cheers. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Proposed deletion of File:SWGClogo.jpg

The file File:SWGClogo.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused logo with no article used, it's also can't move to commons because of an unused logo will be deleted as of out of project scope.

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. Willy1018 (talk) 11:01, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]