User talk:Trampikey/Archive 12

Hello

Please say you're back for good! We desperately need you!!! Have you seen the state of the EastEnders articles? ^anemone│_projectors 15:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't want to jinx it but I should have internet access at home sometime this week, and then I'll be back for good :) I'm out of practice though, I keep forgetting to type [[]] and ~~~~ and do edit summaries etc! -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 15:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, you'll soon get the hang of it again! :) ^anemone│_projectors 15:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 3	14 January 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: A new weekly feature
Special: 2007 in Review	Wikimania 2009 bidding ends, jury named
Controversial non-administrator rollback process added	Supposed advance draft of Jobs keynote surfaces on talk page
WikiWorld comic: "The Nocebo Effect"	News and notes: Fundraiser ends, $500,000 donation, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Tutorial: Fundamentals of editing
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationales

Easy to use: {{Rationale}}. Just make sure you put the right article name next time ;) ^anemone│_projectors 00:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, it's really simple. Much better than copying and pasting an old (and very generic) rationale from another image. ^anemone│_projectors 22:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what to write for "portion", "replaceabilty" and "purpose" -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 22:12, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I always leave "portion" blank anyway. Replaceability is the "no free equivalent is available or could be created" bit and the purpose is the "identifies the subject of the article"/"specifically illustrates a relevant point in the article" bit. Maybe it wasn't as simple as I assumed. For the optional section at the end I always put the "the image is not used in a manner that would likely replace the original market role of the original copyrighted media" bit. In the description bit I always try to say who the character and actor is, and in the source bit you should put the date of the episode. You should try to do that anyway, even if you don't use that template. Although the main thing is getting the article name in there somewhere, which you do, so it doesn't really matter if you don't want to use the template. It's just a suggestion really, so feel free to ignore this. ^anemone│_projectors 22:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

If you do insist of ignoring this template, could you at least use the appropriate bits of text from the {{WPEE FUR}} template? The rationales we used to use are totally rubbish. ^anemone│_projectors 19:50, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) ^anemone│_projectors 00:25, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Portal:EastEnders

Just wanted to remind you that P:EE still exists! The selected articles and DYK sections haven't been updated in a long time! ^anemone│_projectors —Preceding comment was added at 00:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 21st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 4	21 January 2008	About the Signpost

Special: 2007 in Review, Part II	New parser preprocessor to be introduced
Commons Picture of the Year contest in final round	WikiWorld comic: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
News and notes: Freely-licensed music, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 00:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Ye olde EE Infobox

I don't fully understand; I thought the adjustments for the infoboxes would be a bit more of a permanent fixture. I think it looks a bit neater and not so jumbled, but if it's only on certain articles, I can understand. I was also thinking to employ this technique on the Emmerdale ones Conquistador2k6 26 January 10:47 (UTC)

{{Infobox EastEnders character 2}} is actually better than the original and is used on more articles than just Pauline Fowler. The original one is good for the list articles, and the second one is good for articles with a lot of information in the infobox. ^anemone│_projectors 14:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Also one of your edit summaries said "both work fine" so I don't know why you felt the need to revert. ^anemone│_projectors 14:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Bree Van de Kamp

I have reverted your move on this as there was no agreement on this move on the talk page. Please reach agreement on talk page before moving article again. Thank you. Keith D (talk) 13:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 28th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 5	28 January 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: New feature
Special: 2007 in Review, Part III	Signpost interview: John Broughton
New parser preprocessor introduced	Best of WikiWorld: "Truthiness"
News and notes: Estonian Wikipedia, Picture of the Year, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Tutorial: Reporting and dealing with vandals	WikiProject Report: Molecular and Cellular Biology
Wikipedia Dispatches: Banner year for Featured articles	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Trueman 31

How comes you know who i am? --Comando Viper (talk) 19:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

January 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Grant Mitchell (EastEnders). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. SMS ^Talk 19:28, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Why don't u report it to an administrator. --SMS ^Talk 19:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

The Dot Cotton Show

Are you in denial about tonight's EastEnders? ;) ^anemone│_projectors 22:15, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

No, I'm just waiting for someone to write it up well! It was good, wasn't it?! -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 22:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

There's not much you can say about it in her article really, but then again nothing about Jim's illness is mentioned. But yeah it was bloody great. ^anemone│_projectors 22:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to sort out the plot on her article now. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 22:55, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

The Monologue kicked about 20 kinds of Arse. I didn't think EE could pull off a One-hander,but with someone who gives 110% like June Brown, it HAD to be good. If they get screwed over for an award; I say we all march down there and kick up the place! :) Also, your final resolution on the infoboxes? Conquistador2k6 22:59 31 January 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 22:59, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

See WT:WPEE. That has to win the "Best Single Episode" award! -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 23:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I've been saying it has to win that award for a few weeks :) I'd be very shocked if it didn't win. Who hands out that particular award? ^anemone│_projectors 23:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

The British Soap Awards. Nana Moon won it in 2005/2006. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 23:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Zoe and Kat won it too. A two-hander and a special episode. Dot is bound to win. ^anemone│_projectors 23:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I think we should mention somewhere (not sure where) that the closing credits were different to normal and used "Pretty Baby" instead of the usual theme tune. ^anemone│_projectors 00:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I've mentioned it in the section about the episode on the two-handers article. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 23:10, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Selena Branning

Per my note and the EE website, she's Selena, rather than Selina — just thought you'd want to know if you're moving her. DBD 20:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Admin

Are you interested in being one? I think it would be handy to have two admins watching over EE articles, and youve been here ages.Gungadin 17:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

To be honest I think you'd be a better one. I have too bad a history on here... -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

lol, ive been warned for being incivil about 20 times over the last few months, 19 of those were from Elonka (check out my talk and Pauline archives). Plus, if someone started bashing me on the RFA, i'd bash them back, i.e. i'm not a good candidate for being an admin. You know lots about the functioning of wiki and rules and you do a lot of vandal watching. All I do is extend articles, and they will say I dont need admin tools for that. I think we should get you nominated, maybe AP could do it.Gungadin 17:49, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I struggled on my previous RfA, I applied for admin coaching but never got anything back from it - my name's probably still on a list for it somewhere! -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:51, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

See here for my previous RfA. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

That was ages ago. you only got 30 opposers, and most of the stuff they complained about you have corrected. I cant believe people oppose based on edit summaries. That thing is like a job interview!Gungadin 18:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Well feel free to nominate me if you want, I'd hapily be an admin. :) -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:27, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, i'll look into it and see what I have to do.Gungadin 18:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Cool, on an unrelated note, where do you get all your OOU sources from? I'm trying to do an OOU section for Mo Harris, but don't know where to start looking! -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:31, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

This is a good free archive [1] which has loads of old articles. Here's another [2] it's pay for access, but it gives snippets, so you may find something of use in a search. Google archive [3] sometimes comes up with some good stuff. Otherwise it's worthwhile searching through newspaper websites, like The Guardian, Sun and Mirror, Daily Mail etc. Putting in Mo Harris EastEnders into the search bar, and seeing if a review or interview comes up.Gungadin 18:55, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. How's the admin thing going? -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 19:10, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm writing you a summary now, bigging up all your achievements. It's very complicated. Ive run you through wannabe Kate's tool to get your edit count and everything. I dunno if i'm doing it right, lol. This may take some time.Gungadin 19:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

It's really hard to answer the questions because I want to sound good, but whatever you write can't be taken back as it'll always be in the edit history! They hated my answers on my last RfA, so I'm really wary! -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:22, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Dont worry about it, they can always ask you to elaborate. You've matured in your outlook since then anyway, and you know more about wiki in general. Anyway, if it fails, it's not like it matters. We can just nominate you again in a few months :) Gungadin 21:11, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

1 oppose already - off to a great start! And it's because my talk page is "riddled with WP:OR"... -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Admin

Now read this: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/nominate#What to do if you are nominated by someone else. ^anemone│_projectors 20:24, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Just FYI, I have asked you a fallow up question to optional question number 7. Take your time answering, cheers. Tiptoety ^talk 00:28, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Trampikey, hi, just my $0.02 of advice, it's pretty obvious that the RfA isn't going to pass. You might want to consider withdrawing and just closing it, rather than putting yourself through this for another week.  :/ Up to you though. --Elonka 02:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Elonka. I know it probably won't pass; how would I go about it if I decided to withdraw? -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Pretty much the reverse of accepting. Go and cross out your "I accept" language with <s> and </s> tags, and add a line that explains that you are choosing to withdraw at this time. Say as much in your edit summary as well. Also remove the listing from the main RfA page. Then either you or one of the clerks can go in and do the formal "archiving" a bit later, and it'll be over. --Elonka 20:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Well Trampikey, at least you know what to say for your next RFA. Blah Blah Blah communicate, Blah Blah Blah Blah Blah Admins are never wrong, Blah Blah hehe! :)--Gungadin 23:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Lol, yeah. Ugh. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Admin coaching/RfA

If nobody gets back to you, your best bet is to go and harass somebody who supported your RfA. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 09:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Or Pedro; he's good. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 09:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice :) -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Your request for adminship

Hello Trampikey, I have closed your request for adminship in accordance with your withdrawal. Feel free to re-apply for adminship when you are ready to run again, and believe you have addressed your opposition's concerns. If it's any help, several users who are admins now did not pass their first or their second RfAs either. Good luck. Acalamari 00:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

What Acalamari said. Took me three tries, myself!  :) --Elonka 01:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 6	4 February 2008	About the Signpost

Special: 2007 in Review, Part IV	Tensions in journalistic use of Wikipedia explored
Best of WikiWorld: "Calvin and Hobbes"	News and notes: Milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Tutorial: Adding citations
Dispatches: New methods to find Featured Article candidates	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

A little help...

I'm trying to Emulate the success you had with the EE Infobox templates, only my little plan goes tits-up with every attempt:(. I was wondering if you could lend a hand. Mil Gracias if you can.

Conquistador2k6 February 8 2008, 00:36 (UTC)

How do you mean? Could you explain the problem fully? -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

It's all in my contribution history. I'd tried to same winning formula with Emmerdale I basically fluffed the infobox a bit and the relevant info isn't coming through.

The mess is located at Template:Emmerdale character 2.

Conquistador2k6 February 8 2008, 01:42 (UTC)

RFA thanks

.: RFA thanks :.

Thanks for supporting me! My RfA passed with a final tally of 5 neutrals, 1 oppose and 148 supports, a turnout I couldn't have dreamed of. I'm going to do everything I can to help out the community, help with sysop tasks, and of course, contribute to the encyclopedia. If you ever need a hand with something, feel free to give a shout! Cheers! Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 17:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Emma cooke as pat harris.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Emma cooke as pat harris.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hassan osman.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hassan osman.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 11th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 7	11 February 2008	About the Signpost

Petition seeks to remove images of Muhammad	Foundation's FY2007 audit released
Vatican claims out-of-context Wikipedia quote was used to attack Pope	Best of WikiWorld: "W"
News and notes: Working group, Wik-iPhone, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Tutorial: Basic dispute resolution	Dispatches: Great saves at Featured article review
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 14:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Are you/do you know Charlotte McDonagh?

I know Charlie —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisjay00 (talk • contribs)

Speedy deletion of Regina Freedman

A tag has been placed on Regina Freedman 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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's 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. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 00:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Regina Freedman

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Regina Freedman, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Regina Freedman. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 02:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Regina Freedman

I have nominated Regina Freedman, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regina Freedman. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. ЭLСОВВОLД _talk 02:18, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Nana vs Marjorie

Hi. It may have been mentioned in the show that her name was Marjorie, but Wikipedia uses the most common name, and her name is commonly just known as Nana in the show. I've reverted your edits as such. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 09:25, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Alistairmcgownasdot.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Alistairmcgownasdot.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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. Rossrs (talk) 12:45, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 8	18 February 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Michael Snow, Domas Mituzas appointed to Board of Trustees	WikiWorld: "Thinking about the immortality of the crab"
News and notes: Administrator desysopped, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Tutorial: Getting an article to featured article status	Dispatches: FA promotion despite adversity
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 9	25 February 2008	About the Signpost

Signpost interview: Michael Snow	Controversial RfA results in resysopping of ^demon
Sockpuppeting administrator desysopped, community banned	Two major print encyclopedias cease production
WikiWorld: "Hyperthymesia"	News and notes: Wikimania Call for Participation, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: Family Guy
Dispatches: A snapshot of featured article categories	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

EastEnders on hold (GA sweep)

I have reassessed this article as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. We are currently revisiting all listed Good articles in an effort to ensure that they continue to meet the Good article criteria.

In reviewing the article, I came across some issues that may need to be addressed; I have left a detailed summary on the article's talk page. As a result I have put EastEnders's GA status on hold. This will remain in place for a week or so before a final decision is taken as to the article's status.

I've left this notice here because, from the article history, you have been a significant contributor. If you no longer edit this article, please accept my apologies and feel free to disregard this message ;)

Regards, EyeSerene^TALK 13:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 10	3 March 2008	About the Signpost

Wales' relationship, breakup with journalist Rachel Marsden raises questions about possible improprieties	Eleven users apply for bureaucratship
Signpost interview: Domas Mituzas	Role of hidden categories under discussion
Book review: Wikipedia: The Missing Manual	Military history WikiProject elections conclude, nine elected
Best of WikiWorld: "Extreme ironing"	News and notes: Encyclopedia of Life, Wikipedian dies, milestones
Dispatches: April Fools mainpage featured article	WikiProject Report: Football
Tutorial: How to use an ImageMap	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Islamcculloch.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Islamcculloch.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. BJBot (talk) 19:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:David kennedy.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:David kennedy.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. BJBot (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Minors

Thanks for adding today's minors to the past characters list. Any chance you could get the names of the others from this week? There was Matthew, and someone credited as Mr something. I was kinda hoping we could do a kind of "credits patrol" to make sure we get everyone! If not for the past characters list, then at least for my cast list. ^anemone│_projectors 23:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Paulinejoetorchwood.JPG

Thank you for uploading Image:Paulinejoetorchwood.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mark&NickCotton.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Mark&NickCotton.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:06, 8 March 2008 (UTC)