Jump to content

User talk:Secretlondon/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Secretlondon

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Secretlondon (talk | contribs) at 17:15, 19 April 2007 (Reverted edits by 82.30.146.121 (talk) to last version by Secretlondon). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hi SecretLondon - I really need help on quite a scale regarding a global young persons wiki project I started running back in February. My user page is on the wiki at http://www.wikiville.org.uk/index.php/User_talk:Bolton if you can spare a moment. I'm the education Adviser for ICT & Innovation in Bolton Local Authority (Greater Manchester, UK) Many thanks.

I'm offline from Monday 10th April 2006 until further notice

Hey, this IP is an entire school, many of the kids here are idiots and vandalize pages. I'd like to apologize in place of them.

Muhammad Drawings

vandalism ? how is that i'm user of wikipedia as you are also you have to know this opinion in more than 40 islamic countries and i'm working to report drawings page to many authorities. Qatarson 09:42, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow Secretlondon defending freedom of speach when that freedom of speach offends other cultures. It's a shame that Secretlondon doesn't apply the same logic when he/she him/herself is offended.

Secretlondon is responsible for my username User:Jebus Christ being blocked as an offensive username. If anyone here would like to sign the petition I set up on my talk page User talk:Jebus Christ please do so.

Secretlondon, do you not see the hypocracy here? Jimididit 10:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC) formerly User:Jebus Christ[reply]

I wasn't offended. I'm not a Christian. Secretlondon 19:19, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who do you think that you are to dictate what somebody else cannot be called. It is not banal language. You suffocate freedom of speech. --Licinius 11:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't actually block your username. I suggested that you might want to change it - as someone else would block it (as they did). Secretlondon 19:16, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sign DD

Thank you SecretLondon, for the suggestion about how to put a signature. I prefer keeping a low profile here, since my amygdala gets overactive when seeing even remotely aggressive particiants.

Too many people not signing at all saying silly things changed my mind. I shall sign in the future. DanielDemaret 13:04, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the deleted Hellznrg comments?

Dear Secretlondon: How come I can't find Hellznrg's comments regarding bombing of mecca anywhere in the talkpage history for the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons article? L33th4x0r 01:08, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AMA Coordinator Election

Dear AMA Member,

You are entitled to vote in the AMA Coordinator election, set to begin at midnight on 3 February 2006. Please see the pages on the election and its candidates and the procedure and policy and cast a vote by e-mail!

Wally 11:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking guidance

I am seeking your guidance and advice on a particular issue. Mahuri page on wikipedia was initiated by me, and I have contributed to the page from time to time. As per policy of the wikipedia anyone can use the contents of wikipedia, but I understand that use of such contents should indicate the source, that is, the wikipedia. The contents of the page Mahuri have been used in the site mahurivaisya without giving any reference to wikipedia - though I am glad that they have used our contents. In this case, a problem may arise at a future date if that website takes a stand that the contents of page Mahuri on wikipedia have been copied from that site and thus violates copyrights. In an alternative scenario, a user here may tag our Mahuri page with copyright violation under the impression that our contents have been copied from that site, reference to which was given by me long back as an external link when that site was not active and having only a welcome page. Although I am not aware of any such issue, which wikipedians may have encountered in the past, I believe that such a situation may have arisen earlier too. I seek your advice and guidance to deal with this issue, which you are requested to kindly post on my talk page please I also utilize this opportunity to say Hello to you. Thanks. --Bhadani 13:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation

You are invited to take part in Wikipedia_talk:Changing username#Dropping inactive user names. Ems2 17:46, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EffK, etc.

User:Flamekeeper, User:Fiamekeeper, User:Corecticus, and User:PureSoupS are also sockpuppets/identities of the same editor. Robert McClenon 20:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, they're not sockpuppets in the normal sense of the word. (I just came to this page because I saw on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/EffK that you had banned Famekeeper as an admitted sockpuppet.[1], and I see Robert has just pointed out that he has other identities.) In fact, while Famekeeper and EffK are the same person, and also, as Robert says, Flamekeeper, Fiamekeeper, Corecticus, and PureSoupS, it's not a normal case of sockpuppetry. He registered originally as Flamekeeper, but did not want to give Wikipedia his e-mail address. Therefore, when after a few months the computer asked him to re-enter his password, which he had lost, he had to register a new account. This happened several times. He has never tried to deny that his new account was a reincarnation of an old one, and has on various occasions denied that he used sockpuppets. He recently made a long farewell speech, and signed it as EffK, then logged in again as Flamekeeper, and signed, saying that he had found his password, then signed again as Corecticus and Famekeeper, but said he was unable to sign as Fiamekeeper, and didn't attempt to sign as PureSoupS. Since he has been open about these identities, and never used two accounts simultaneously, until the night of his grand farewell, if you decide to block the other accounts, I think it would be fairer not to use the word "sockpuppet" in the block log. Cheers. AnnH (talk) 20:54, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Secretlondon, I don't know where to put this so I am writing to you. I thought User:EffK was banned but, as it appears, he is still posting today and yesterday. He is not doing much damage but I should like to know when he will be gone. Cheers, Str1977 20:23, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He's gone. Looks like a previous block overlapped with his 1 year block causing him to become unblocked. Secretlondon 20:26, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
He has only been editing his own talk page. And blocked users are technically able to do that. As far as I know, that was a new feature requested by Ed Poor last summer, so that blocked users would still have a means of communication. I'm not sure if banned (as opposed to simply "blocked") users are allowed to edit their talk page — perhaps that could be clarified. Certainly, EffK seems to believe he's allowed to do so, so if he isn't, he should be informed. I don't think he's able to edit anything other than his talk page, but the only way to make it impossible for him to edit that is to protect it, which would also mean that nobody else (except admins) could post there. AnnH (talk) 20:55, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. If there are any problems then let me know - he's not allowed to use it as a soapbox for example. If people ignore him he'll get bored. Secretlondon 20:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know that. His last edit was accusing me of deleting something from an archive - which is technically true, but it was my erroneous archiving that made this necessary in the first place (I put content from one talk page into the archive of another ..). Str1977 21:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename user

Hi Secretlondon, perhaps you are able to help me :-)

My name is Tim Bartel and I'm active since 2002 under the user name 'Avatar' throughout many Wikimedia projects (for more info see my german user page). I'm admin in WP-DE and the commons, but active as user in several more projects. Problem: the only project I'm not registered as 'Avatar' is WP-EN. So (regarding towards the single sign-on coming hopefully soon) I really like my username renamed from 'Avatar-en' to 'Avatar' here in WP-EN. But I can't use the formal procedure at Wikipedia:Changing_username because the user Avatar already exists.

If this would be a "normal" user, I would just keep my username Avatar-en and shut up - but it isn't a normal user. The account seems to be more than 2 years old and has no single edit. So I ask you if it's possible to delete the account or rename it, and then rename my username from Avatar-en to Avatar. That would be very nice. (In case you wonder: I ask you, because you are the first bureaucrat mentioned at the changing username discussion page :-) --Avatar-en 11:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:AlbertMemorial.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:AlbertMemorial.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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.

Gabbe 15:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Listed buildings

Great stuff, adding the BaR entries. Will continue slogging through the London boroughs on EH later, but not now. It's looking a little less haphazard, now, I think, well at least in London anyway. But then also have to check for entries and pix... Tarquin Binary 00:38, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Account Question

When I decided to edit in the Swedish Wikipedia, I had to make a new account with exactly the same name. So if I want to edit the german, french, danish, norwegian, spanish sites, I would have to have seven accounts, all with the same name. There must be a terribly good reason for this. Perhaps you could enlighten me?DanielDemaret 17:53, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crown Copright template

Hi. Why was Template:CrownCopyright protected? It needs a major change to warn (within the template itself) that CC-usage can only be determined on a site-by-site basis. Many users now think anything that's Crown Copyright is fair game which it most definetly isn't! Thanks Mark83 23:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UKCOTW error

My mistake - Sorry about that. My PC's been acting crazy today. --Neutralitytalk 22:12, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Borough High street.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 19:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from my talk page --Sherool (talk) 19:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Borough High Street image - when I uploaded them (years ago) I linked to an email I had saying that anyone could use for any purpose. I don't know if we still have that information (I don't work for Southwark any more). Secretlondon 19:22, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, was this e-mail posted online somewhere? Maybe the Wayback machine have it archived. It's just that I'm a bit iffy about claiming that content from a website labeled as "all rights reserved" are in fact free for any purpose without anything to back it up (no offense). How about e-mailing them and ask them to re-comfirm the "any purpose" release and forward a copy of theyr reply to Wikimedia as described on Wikipedia:Confirmation of permission. --Sherool (talk) 19:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Rodgers photo

Hi. If you get a chance, could you check out this photo of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Jim_Rodgers.jpg for me? I copied it over from http://nigov.tmtm.com/wiki/Image:Jim_Rodgers.jpg, for which I can find no info as I'm not a member of that site. I'm not entirely sure about the whole thing tbh. Thanks. --Mal 08:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help with an Image?

Hi. I uploaded Image:02MA-Ivette.jpg and Image:Conan&Andy.jpgbefore I realized that there was info on them I don't want on WP, as well as other Photoshop work that one of them needed. Can you delete them for me? Thanks. Nightscream 02:32, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again! And speaking of images, if you ever need to commission one for you, be sure to check out my User Page, as I just finished adding 20 images of my artwork to it. :-) Nightscream 05:16, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for advocacy

Hello, I am an editor on the 2004 U.S. presidential election controversy and irregularities article. Recently a user has voiced a number of complaints about the article, and a number of editors, including myself, have replied. Unfortunately, the discussion between he and I has deteriorated to such an extent that he has taken to ignoring me.[2] I was hoping you might be interested in acting as an advocate for me in this dispute, providing your views on the issue or how it can be resolved, or anything else you think may help before I take the next step and attempt more formal mediation. The details of the dispute are on the article's talk page, starting here. It might also be helpful to look at the article's edit history starting at 2006-05-04 04:11:57 UTC, and the talk pages of the various participants. Any help you could give would be appreciated. -- noosphere 01:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have very poor internet access currently and can't commit to anything - sorry. I've been 75% offline since early April. Secretlondon 16:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thanks anyway. -- noosphere 20:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sveasoft

I totally agree with your comment on the talk page there. Any help you can give with that one would be much appreciated. :-) --Jimbo Wales 21:31, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you fix one of your page regarding a category please?

Hi. talk:Secretlondon/Archive 2 is wrongly part of Category:Free software culture and documents. I've tried, but I can't find why that page is in that category. Can you please fix this? Gronky 00:13, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion

As you can see from the log I delete LOTS of things while working Speedy Deletions. I had never been involved with the article (check I've never been involved with it) until after I deleted the image. After seeing the issues I immediately commented on the image talk (since deleted) and the article talk as to my possible article deletion, and that I would NOT contest a properly copyrightsed image being reuploaded. I am aware that image deletions are permenant, but this this deletion in good faith. We will all make an error occasionaly, and I will be checking realted edits more frequently in the future on image deletions. Let me know if you have any more questions. — xaosflux Talk 03:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject London

Hi, we are having an update of participation at Wikipedia:WikiProject London and are asking members to bold their names if they are still contributing to London-related projects. Inactive members will be removed at the end of the month. Thanks for participating, COME ON ENGLAND! DJR COME ON ENGLAND! (Talk) 15:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-ejaculate

Wikipedia:Profanity: "Words and images that might be considered offensive, profane, or obscene by other Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if their omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternatives are available." A picture of some exhibitionist's penis is indeed profane and, judging from the discussion page and frequent deletions, is clearly offensive. It does not add to the article at all, since "clear lubricating fluid that is issued from a man's penis when he is sexually aroused" pretty much tells the whole story. Clearly, you have this on their watchlist, choosing to ignore the link at "Wikipedia is not censored" to Wikipedia:Profanity, and re-add every time someone deletes. And many people will not be convinced by Wikipedia policy that violates their own ideas of what Wikipedia should be. But I hope that you will respect not only what Wikipedia rules say, but also what Wikipedia aspires to be. People who insist on unnecessary explicit photographs will make Wikipedia something avoided by teachers, students, the press, and the general public, since it enforces the popular image of Wikipedia as a Wild West where smut and lies are easily promulgated, rather than a self-regulating source of information that is just as reliable and relevant as a traditional encyclopedia. 192.68.228.4 22:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for messaging me with your concern. I forgot to check the "case sensitive" box, which is why that happened. Sorry and thanks for taking the time to tell me. I am going through each and every edit to make sure that didn't happen anywhere else. --mboverload@ 19:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletions

Thanks for letting me know. I'm sorry, I will link to the replacement images from now on, I was linking to the articles because I had a problem earlier with linking to one specific image. Wih regards to the images of Anna Ford, I'll swop the images listed for deletion around. What happened was I decided Image:BBCannaford.jpg was actually a better image than the previous version at Image:Af (03).JPG.jpg. I decided therefore to uploaded the former to the latter and remove the image, but now I think I'll do the opposite. Make sense? Thanks for the guidance. :) Wikiwoohoo 11:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've sorted it now. I confuse myself sometimes! Wikiwoohoo 12:00, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

local - Kennington

SL - I've finally replied to your coments on Kennington Park. Please also see my Flickr blog of photos http://www.flickr.com /photos/stefan-szczelkun/

Maybe see you for a coffee one day? Stefan Szczels 14:34, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know?

Updated DYK query On July 8, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Helene Hayman, Baroness Hayman, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Your AMA statement was deleted

Your AMA statement was deleted apparently carelessly from the AMA statements page (see this edit)if your statement needs to be restored, the text is at User:Pedant/AMA error Pedant 02:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject:Architecure Peer Review proposal

I'm trying to build a consensus for a Wikiproject Peer review process. I've opened a discussion page here. Would you like to comment? Would you be prepared to take part in the peer review process? Many thanks. --Mcginnly | Chinwag 12:12, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IG Farben Building FAC

Also, I posted the IG Farben Building on the FAC on the 17th July. It currently has a support consensus, but only from 4 people. I'd be more comfortable with a stronger consensus and was wondering if you might be prepared to comment on the article? Many thanks. --Mcginnly | Chinwag 12:12, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Article

Look, sorry for putting it up for CSD. I'm not sure what to say...I make mistakes. alphaChimp laudare 05:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for getting stressed about it. I've never had that happen to me before and took it personally (wrongly). Secretlondon 05:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I probably would have been pissed too. Thanks for not indef blocking me =D. By the way, as I look at the article, the notability isn't immediately apparent to me (obviously the links bear out a different story). I think the issue is my name recognition of the bands. Is there something we could say there that would make it more clear? alphaChimp laudare 05:21, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I hope I've never a "rouge admin" ;) It's a band that's pretty influential (in US hipster circles at least) but I don't know that much about. I need to add more, and hope others join in. Secretlondon 05:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

To be fair, popups aren't really automatic. It was entirely my decision to revert chav. (I'd never heard of that spelling variant, but by the name I would assume you know a bit more about British spelling than I do.) --Emufarmers(T/C) 05:40, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for uploading Image:Patricia hewitt.jpg, Image:Gerry sutcliffe.jpg, Image:Jacqui smith.jpg, Image:Lord sainsbury.jpg, Image:Mike obrien.jpg, Image:Nigel griffiths.jpg and Image:Stephen timms.jpg. They may be deleted as they only tags they have are CrownCopyright. Thanks, ed g2s • talk 21:59, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough - they were uploaded 2 1/2 years ago :) Secretlondon 08:05, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sandi Thom

Sorry for putting the POV and spam tags up; apologies! --TheM62Manchester 11:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many, better than none

You're right. I had the wrong boilerplate edit summary on my clipboard. Here is the proper one: Stub-sorting. You can help!

Also...

Hello,

Thank you for your stub submission. You may wish to note that it is preferable to use a stub template from Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types instead of using simply {{stub}}, if you can.

Thanks! Woodshed 13:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lying is not necessary to have a NPOV

Just to let you know, I don't believe one has to lie in order to make Raëlian Church NPOV. Why are the criticism sections unacceptable? I welcome criticism sections, but you deleted them. Why? Do you not want criticism of the Raelian Movement? That would be more objective than not having one. If you do what you just did, you are making it harder for people to add other points of view.Kmarinas86 17:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chav ImagesforDeletion

August 9
  • (diff) (hist) . . Chav‎ 13:01 . . User:Secretlondon (Talk | contribs) (Remove photographs which are up for deletion - WHAT ON EARTH WERE YOU THINKING OF? This is an encyclopedia. we do not want candid camera photographs of derogatory stereotypes)

Thank you for looking at the images that were added to the above site. You recomended them for Fast Delete, so they are gone now.

I do however, take exception to the comment(above) that followed your removal of the images.

  • "WHAT ON EARTH WERE YOU THINKING OF?" I am not some kind of naughty child, who does reckless things on the spur of the moment. Everything, I do is given consideration and thought. Indeed the images had to be cropped and RGB changes made to them. The photographs were carefully considered, which brings me to.....
  • "This is an encyclopedia." Yes, I understand that. Throughout there history encyclopedias have been illustrated, to give the reader a physical idea of the concepts explained in the written form. Did you mean that my WP:NPOV was at fault? Do you understand me to be a modern day Leni Riefenstahl? Capturing images, that do not portray actual living human beings who fit into the definition as explained in the article. The article also goes someway to define the sterotypes involved. The pictures were illustrative.
  • "We (Sic) do not want candid camera photographs of derogatory stereotypes" Exactly, who is we? Did you actually look at the pictures? What part of them makes you feel uneasy about them? The photographs were posed close up photographs, obviously taken with the permission of the people involved. They were not blurry, out of focus, behind net curtain pictures. There are plenty of those kind of pictures on some sites devoted to ridiculing and enshrining the myths about "alternative young people".

As, per derogatory stereotypes; there is some debate whether a not many or at least some of the "alternative young people" describe themselves as a self moniker as Chav, Ned (Scottish) or Scally. To be told that by posting the photographs (you seriously underestimate my feelings towards those "alternative young people") I was merely perpetuating a notion of the youth that would render the complete article WP:POV, does not take into account my complete neutrality.

I have been told today that my work was Disparaging, using stereotypes and that the use of the word Chav was both racist / derogatory by User:BigDT. Why somebody from the United States should believe that about me, simply based on a small listing in IfD is beyond me. Do they not have access to Wikidictionary or Wikipedia in the US? Completely absurd. Perhaps some editors should spend more time looking at the broader picture, than making snap decisions based on their own definitions of policy, or where policy is absolute not seeking to find out if their initial reaction is justified. Mike33 20:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They were nominated for normal image deletion, not speedy deletion. I doubt very much that they posed knowing that they were being used to illustrate a derogatory stereotype in an international online encyclopedia. Chav is not a neutral subculture on a par with goth etc, it is a term used to describe working class youth from outside. No-one self defines as one. Secretlondon 13:05, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank Your For your reply. The Human Rights Act (1998) hasn't yet been tested in relation to still photography. UK law as such, does neither allow nor disallow most photographs (exceptions are sexual or to do with children) being taken whether or not the participant wanted the photograph taking or not. Digital Photography allows everybody to see a thumbnail of the image taken moments ago.

Wikipedia is not an arbitrator of good or bad taste (notice how I don't use the word WE); there are many articles about individuals who have juped subjects for private gain Bum fights etc. When I take photographs, they are always done with permission, if it involves individual people or groups. Without permission, it is more than likely, that ones camera would be broken into pieces within seconds of taking Candid Camera type shots.

Whether or not any of my subjects would describe themselves as being Chavs is beside the point (if you do have a point?). The images matched the descriptions in the article. Will you remove Image:Chav.jpg

Cartoon Chav - Chav.jpg

because it depicts (albeit in cartoon fashion) a "British Chav"? Other editors (eg: BigDT) use guidance from native speaking editors when it comes to Attack words. Chav is not the same as Pikey, Nigger, Coon or Paki. For the most part, (particulary in UK gay culture), Chav or in the north Scally is self descriptive of working class guys who dress in sportswear. Perhaps you don't come into contact with many young people, Perhaps you think that The International will redefine notions of class and youthful decadency, Perhaps you beleive that youth culture should be looked at historically 20 years later (punks, rudeboys, etc.). I don't know.

As Per, Speedy delete, the moment you classed it as Attack - the picture were doomed, as well you know. I haven't been on Wikipedia very long, but I always presumed there was more than one voice in the WE. Mike33 13:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Postcript - Just reviewing the words coon and paki redirects us to List of ethnic slurs A chav, ned or scally does not have to be white or even working class. Maybe editors should work in real time and ammend things which are clearly untrue. Chav, ned and scally are about being British, feeling disaffected, its certainly not about race or colour. Mike33 15:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was just going to review your use of goth (that being a catch all description for anyone into moshing/rock/skating/neo-punk/emos, need WE go on.....) and use the word Lumpen (German Rubbish people/outcastes) to describe our chavs and emo kids - Please check out Lumpenproletariat and see common usage of lumpen in Russia. Can I post a picture of a street kid in russia to illustrate? or am I Leni Riefenstahl again???? Mike33 03:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saved Sect

I didnt' understand your edit to The Saved Sect, saying information published by a major British newspaper is "potentially libellous"??AndrewRT 23:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:FTmuseum.jpg

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to delete. Secretlondon 19:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Peckham_sq.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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:South_London_Gallery.jpg

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Devolution (fallacy)

Your edit on the article Devolution (fallacy) has been deleted after a discussion about the purpose of the article. I am planning to start a new article which could be called 'Devolution (pseudoscience)'. Perhaps you would like to participate in the creation of this new article, or share your opinion about the recent changes in the old article.--Daanschr 13:53, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Nomination: Dee Doocey

An article that you have been involved in editing, Dee Doocey, has been listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dee Doocey. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Several other members of the London Assembly have also been nominated for deletion. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 04:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Welcome!
File:World map.gif

Hi, and welcome to the Countries WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of counties.


There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:

  • Starting some new articles? See some model pages such as Cambodia!
  • Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every country article in Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Shy1520 10:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Angel.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Angel.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. Liftarn 10:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Image:Maclean p 1101.jpg

Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Maclean p 1101.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 free image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

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 any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. – Quadell (talk) (random) 22:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Association of Members' Advocates

Hi, you are receiving this message because you have listed yourself as an active member of WP:AMA. If you aren't currently accepting inquiries for AMA, or if you have resigned, please de-list yourself from Wikipedia:AMA Members. If you are still active, please consider tending to any new requests that may appear on Category:AMA Requests for Assistance. We're going to put AMA on wheels. :) Sorry for the template spamming - we're just trying to update our records, after we had a huge backlog earlier in the week (if you've been taking cases, then sorry, and please ignore this :)). Again, sorry, and thanks! Martinp23 21:30, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of External link on Ubuntu article

At 21.00 on the 17 November 2006 you removed an external link on the ubuntu article. I have looked through the Wikipedia:External links article (which is part of the manual of style) and I can not find a good reason why it should be removed. I would appreciate it if you could get back to me why you removed it, as i would very much like to put the external link back. --Benjaminevans82 19:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LIDLFrontageinLondon.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:LIDLFrontageinLondon.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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 its not being deleted. Thank you. —Nv8200p talk 02:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Photo Matching Service

Hi there,

I'm contacting you because you listed yourself at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers. You might be interested in a new wikiproject page that lists photographers and articles that need photos by location. The page is located at Wikipedia:Photo Matching Service or WP:PMS GabrielF 00:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture bulletin

WikiProject Architecture Bulletin  

A new Historic houses task force has been created.

Please join if you are interested!

Announcements - please add your Project announcements  


Articles at Peer Review - edit list
Machu Picchu
Manor House, Sleaford
Endeavour House
Taliesin (studio)
New article announcements - add new architecture article to list
Articles related to architecture over the past two weeks are listed automatically by AlexNewArtBot.

This list was generated from these rules. Questions and feedback are always welcome! The search is being run daily with the most recent ~14 days of results. Note: Some articles may not be relevant to this project.

Rules | Match log | Results page (for watching) | Last updated: 2024-12-24 19:12 (UTC)

Note: The list display can now be customized by each user. See List display personalization for details.


DYK announcements - add new architecture article to list
New participants (add me)
Jpboudin, Mayarrow, Nwhysel, Cassianto, Jtmorgan
This template will be updated regularly. If you would rather not receive this bulletin, just delete it from your talk page.

Image:Fergus ewing.jpeg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Fergus ewing.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. — —Bkell (talk) 07:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Trojan records logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Trojan records 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 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 10:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations

Greetings! After a long period of discussion and consensus building, the policy on usurping usernames has been approved, and a process has been set up to handle these requests. Since you listed yourself on Wikipedia:Changing username/Requests to usurp, you are being notified of the adopted process for completing your request.

If you are still interested in usurping a username, please review Wikipedia:Usurpation. If your request meets the criteria in the policy, please follow the process on Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations. Please note that strict adherence to the policy is required, so please read the instructions carefully, and ask any questions you may have on the talk page.

If you have decided you no longer wish to usurp a username, please disregard this message. Essjay (Talk) 12:46, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This message delivered by EssjayBot. Please direct any questions to Essjay.

Image:GeorgeReidSNP.jpeg

Thanks for uploading Image:GeorgeReidSNP.jpeg. 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:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. 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 48 hours after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ed g2s • talk 16:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Alan Ingram.jpeg

Thanks for uploading Image:Alan Ingram.jpeg. 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:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. 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 any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Chowbok ☠ 01:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More replaceable fair use images

—Chowbok ☠ 02:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All the old politician ones can go.. Secretlondon 03:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Secretlondon/Archive_6&oldid=124129754"