User talk:LJ Holden/September 2010 - January 2016

File permission problem with File:Banks head and shoulder.jpg

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

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

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

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

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia: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. The thing is, it's not enough to just say you got permission. That proof needs to be submitted to the OTRS team. Hammersoft (talk) 22:07, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Animated map of New Zealand provinces

Hi there. As far as I can tell the animated map of New Zealand provinces is your work (if not, please let me know who I should be directing this message to). Currently the map shows Stewart Island as being part of Otago from 1853-61 and as part of Southland from 1861-70. I've just found out (through the local newspaper's equivalent of DYK) that Stewart Island was annexed to Southland on 10th November 1863 after some time without having any government. Daveosaurus (talk) 01:16, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. So post New Leinster had no provincial government until 1863? --LJ Holden 04:05, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll have to borrow McClintock's centenary history and see if he says anything about it, but it seems not; particularly after the creation of the province of Otago. This has also got me wondering as to whether the Chatham Islands were ever in a province; these days they seem to get tacked onto Canterbury or Wellington as an afterthought (I think they're in Wellington Land District; I'm not sure what electorate they're in, but vaguely recall they were associated with Lyttelton. I suppose I should look it up on Wikipedia...) Daveosaurus (talk) 11:19, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They're now part of Rongotai (Wellington), but were Lyttelton until 1996 I think. --LJ Holden 12:09, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've found out what I can from McLintock (which is not a lot) and taken the discussion to the Provinces of New Zealand talk page. Daveosaurus (talk) 06:33, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you may remember me from my days active on NZR articles. These days I am working on my PhD on the provincial system, and I'd just like to point out that the map is inaccurate re: New Munster and New Ulster. The boundary it shows for 1841 is actually the boundary for 1846 (New Munster incorporating the southern North Island), and vice versa. This also means that the still images on the New Munster article are inaccurate, as is the image on the New Ulster article (that is New Ulster of 1841; from 1846 to 1852, the southern portion was part of New Munster).

I should note, however, that the animated map is accurate re: New Leinster, i.e. that it should appear on the 1841 map but not the 1846 one. That said, I'm dubious whether New Leinster should even be included. The 1841 terminology was purely geographic; it served no political purpose and it is not accurate to say there was ever a New Leinster Province in the crown colony era. As for Stewart Island in the provincial era, I was looking at George Grey's despatches to the Colonial Secretary just the other day and noted that it was not included in any of the provincial boundaries when he proclaimed the new provinces in March 1853. - Axver (talk) 02:32, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Axver, I'd very much like to read your PhD! The map is based on the information from the New Zealand Historical Atlas, so if it's inaccurate then so is the Atlas, although you're probably aware of this! :-) --LJ Holden 03:27, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

You'll have to forgive me for the extreme lateness of this reply - I suppose it speaks to how little I edit here these days. However, I was on the provinces page and noticed the maps are still inaccurate, which reminded me of the message I'd left you last year! Are you referring to the Bateman NZ Historical Atlas, ed. Malcolm McKinnon and published in 1997? Because its Map 31a is accurate and conforms to what I described above. The governors' proclamations published in newspapers on PapersPast also confirm Wikipedia's maps are muddled. I'd sort out the graphic myself if I had even the faintest clue how; it really needs to be fixed. Axver (talk) 05:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Axver, sure - I will need to know what the accurate boundaries are though before I can make changes to it. --LJ Holden 06:21, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cool; it's really quite a simple change, though I may not explain it with simple clarity. 1841 should show the North Island as New Ulster, the South Island as New Munster, and Stewart Island as New Leinster (though these were not provinces and had no governments - it was more a proclamation of geographical nomenclature). Under the 1846 Constitution, George Grey in March 1848 proclaimed two provinces: New Ulster would be the North Island north of a line drawn horizontally across the island from the Patea River mouth, and New Munster would be the rest of the country south of that border (i.e. this is the same border as that incorrectly shown as 1841 on the map). Is that clear at all? I could muddle things further by pointing out that a Major Richmond was sent south as a Superintendent of the "Southern District" in 1843 by FitzRoy. The Nelson Examiner rather aptly described him as "that ambiable but useless functionary"; he was meant to represent the Governor to the settlers of Wellington and Nelson. Axver (talk) 08:00, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commonwealth republics

Hi. Your map of Commonwealth republics is missing Vanuatu (present on the map (west of Fiji and north-east of New Caledonia) but incorrectly coloured grey) and Kiribati (absent from the map altogether). I would fix it myself, but I can't work out how to upload a corrected version of the map to replace the existing one. Aridd (talk) 17:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, yes the map needs to be replaced.--LJ Holden 12:10, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

This permission does not give you any special status or authority
Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 18:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

99 referendum

I think you're splitting hairs when you say moving paragraphs from one article to another involves no deletion. An article has experienced the deletion of a chunk of text - in this case, significant text. With regards to the 99 referendum this information most certainly belongs in that article - although it could do with an edit. Mdw0 (talk) 00:49, 17 February 2011 (UTC) [reply]

I'm sorry, but the argument against deletion is surely that information has been removed from Wikipedia as a whole. However, I concede that the article could do with an edit, particularly the "Background" of the referendum, which the alternatives would come under. I'll put up a suggested change to the article on its talk page. --LJ Holden 02:33, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Each article needs to be the best it can be - both in terms of readability and quality of information. Just because someone creates a related article, that doesnt mean cannibalising and deleting information from the original to its own detriment. As for the changes to the article - Be Bold - but remember this is a political article with vested interests. If you boldly step on toes you can expect reversals - all good fun. Mdw0 (talk) 05:41, 17 February 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Fair enough. What do you think about a "Background" section in a re-write? --LJ Holden 05:44, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I quite like 'Divisions in the Electorate.' All the background can go in there. Mdw0 (talk) 03:28, 18 February 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Chairman of Committees

Hello Lewis, I'd appreciate if you could cast your eye over Chairman of Committees (New Zealand). I wrote that article as I was expanding Frederick Merriman (politician), and to be honest, I had never even heard of that role before. There isn't a wealth of information online, so I wonder whether I got it right? Are there other relevant facts that the article ought to state? Schwede 66 18:22, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting - I'd read a reference to the position before (I think in McGee's Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand) but will have another look at it. Very good article though. --LJ Holden 20:26, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the accolades. I whipped that together real quick. If you happen to come across a list of office holders, that should obviously be added to it. I have the list up to 1950 (I have a copy of Scholefield's Parliamentary History), Hugo999 has access to Wilson (1985), so there's only a handful of years missing right at the end. The article is currently nominated at DYK, so I haven't added the list up to 1950 to the article, as I want to avoid the problem of the article appearing 'half finished'. Schwede 66 05:19, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kapiti Line

I have moved or changed the templates for Paraparaumu Line to Kapiti Line. There were no restrictions on you doing it yourself as it is only the parent template "S-line" that is protected. You may want you can change all the templates in each station article to match, as they have now all become redirects. Sw2nd (talk) 15:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Key

Why is having the Governor-General in that infobox, considered releveant? The Governors-General weren't in most of the infoboxes of the other NZ Prime Ministers. GoodDay (talk) 22:45, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they should be. It's as relevant as having the Queen listed in the infobox - the office exists and is constitutionally above the PM. --LJ Holden 22:48, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I just figured they weren't on the Canadian PM infoboxes & all but 2 of the Australian PM infoboxes, so I deleted. Anyways, I won't make a big fuss over it, as there's 15 commonwealth realms with GGs. GoodDay (talk) 23:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of Governors-General of New Zealand

Since you weighed in at Talk:List of Governors-General of New Zealand#Arrangement, I thought I'd ask you to cast an eye over the changes I've made. First, I made use of rowspan to show overlaps in monarchs and PMs. Then, I replaced the "Title" column with colour coding. I'm uncertain about my colour choices, but find-and-replace can fix that easily enough. I would like to know whether you think the basic idea works. -Rrius (talk) 03:28, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Treaty of Waitangi

Regarding the Treaty of Waitangi signature edits, what does POV IMHO mean? Although some more references are needed, wouldn't it be appropriate to include the information related to non-signatories? The very biased One New Zealand Foundation has articles that mention tribes who have received claim monies even though they aren't signatories, although more as just a compilation of information than for propaganda use. I think it is worthy of mention that the treaty wasn't signed by various groups, and yet they are treated as beholden to it in some matters.207.62.238.139 (talk) 16:58, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I didn't say that non-signatories weren't important. There is some information on how the non-signatories are treated, which doesn't square with the sub-section as it stands. BTW, POV means Point Of View, IMHO means In My Humble Opinion. --LJ Holden 22:07, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

New MP pages

If you have time before Friday evening, your help with this politics task force collaboration would be much appreciated! If you have questions, please ask them there. Schwede 66 07:32, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Cropped-nikki-kaye-john-key-wynyard-quarter.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Cropped-nikki-kaye-john-key-wynyard-quarter.jpg, which you've sourced to http://www.nikkikaye.co.nz/. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

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

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Avenue (talk) 11:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The creative commons notices is at the bottom of the page. --LJ Holden 19:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, not all creative commons licenses are suitable for content on Wikipedia. This one is ND (no derivatives), and that's not allowed here. I think our policy is too restrictive, but it is our policy.-gadfium 19:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bugger. I'll contact the author. --LJ Holden 19:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

NZR DF class (1979) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to The Dominion Post

Tranz Rail (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to The Dominion Post

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited NZR DJ class, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diesel (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) 11:17, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

edit conflict

oops. I just noted the AUT part. was heading to remove and you bet me to it :D Brian | (Talk) 01:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Officially yes until the AGM which is about a month away. But Simon has basically stood aside as a result of the election. Brian | (Talk) 02:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Goodo. Are you running? :-D --LJ Holden 02:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

LOL. I'll pass on the opportunity to have you destroy me when breakfast TV does the odd interview... :D Brian | (Talk) 02:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You'd be fine... just tell the truth and I'll play nice ;-) --LJ Holden 02:23, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Tranz alpine poster.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tranz alpine poster.jpg, which you've sourced to http://www.flickr.com/photos/branxholm/3794167419/in/set-72157618854284492. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

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

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note:Even if the Flickr image had a license it's unlikely to be allowed as NZ has No Freedom of Panorama for 2D images, like posters Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:51, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My God this is frustrating. There's a permission e-mail loaded into the license template. I can't be bothered mucking around with getting another e-mail with a specific reference to the type of license used. --LJ Holden 19:32, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Waitangi Day, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paul Holmes (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) 11:15, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re NZR DL class Requested Move

LJ Holden. You need to provide a rationale for the move and sign your move request with ~~~~ to feed the RM bot. Absent a rationale and date/time stamps, the RM bot gets an upset tummy. --Mike Cline (talk) 01:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:NZR K class 919.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:NZR K class 919.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

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

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:52, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. When you recently edited New Zealand Railways Road Services, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Straker (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) 10:46, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your sig

Hi LJ, could you add a link to your signature pointing to your user or user talk page? It's required by the guidelines and it makes contacting you much easier for other users. Thanks for understanding, Jafeluv (talk) 13:47, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed :-) --LJ Holden 20:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:NZR mid 1939 poster.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NZR mid 1939 poster.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file 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. Bulwersator (talk) 08:53, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Sir-James-Fletcher.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sir-James-Fletcher.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) 09:24, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1841 Legislative Council

Hi Lewis, not sure whether you've got the LC on your watchlist. If not, can I please draw your attention to the article's talk page? I'd value your opinion. Schwede 66 05:04, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Colony of New Zealand (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ordinances

New Zealand Legislative Council (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ordinances

New Zealand Parliament (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Ordinances

Prime Minister of New Zealand (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:45, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Non-free content policy and guideline

Please do not place or replace any non-free images to any pages except for actual articles, as you did at User:LJ Holden/temp1. Such use is a clear violation of point number 9 of our policy concerning the use of non-free images. Continuing to do so can be viewed as disruptive behaviour and you may be blocked from editing. VernoWhitney (talk) 02:26, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

Dont think this needs to be said as your an oldtimer ...but being fair both involved parties being warned.Moxy (talk) 21:25, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Australian head of state dispute shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing other editors—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of the rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation.

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

Hello, LJ Holden. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is [[{{{Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard}}}#Official sources|Official sources]].The discussion is about the topic Australian head of state dispute. Thank you.

Orphaned non-free media (File:Tranz scenic logo.PNG)

Thanks for uploading File:Tranz scenic logo.PNG. 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:11, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:DSC 2665 at Wellington Station.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:DSC 2665 at Wellington Station.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file 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. Dianna (talk) 00:24, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Allen Bell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ndebele (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) 12:59, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Zealand EM class electric multiple unit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Dominion Post (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) 12:59, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

David Shearer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to David Cunliffe

New Zealand Labour Party leadership election, 2011 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to David Cunliffe

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sian Elias - your revert of my edit

While the material that I removed is cited, as you noted in your edit summary, it is either direct quotation or close paraphrasing of material from the NZ Herald article. As such, it requires in-text attribution or else it is plagiarism and violates copyright. It would be fair use to quote it, but not to include substantially verbatim quotes from the article with only a footnote. When I have some more time I intend to work on the article and may well include some of this material with proper attribution. Feel free to restore it with such attribution, but please do not simply revert my edit again. Neljack (talk) 07:27, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am rather mystified by your suggestion that I was threatening you. That was certainly not my intention - I was just requesting that you not restore the material again because it was a copyright violation. I have no problem with you putting the copyright tag on, though I have extended it to cover the "Contentious cases" section too, since I removed that material on copyright grounds too. I note that the copyright policy only requires tagging in the case of suspected copyright violation. In the case of a clear violation, which I believe this was, there is nothing in the policy that requires it. Neljack (talk) 05:27, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have never doubted your good faith. I asked you not to revert it because it was a copyright violation, as I had explained, and obviously violating copyright can cause legal problems. You seem to be the one failing to assume good faith when you say: "Your statement that I must not revert your edits was obviously not in good faith." Neljack (talk) 07:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you will accept my assurance that my comments have been made in good faith, and not because of any malice or animosity towards you (as we haven't crossed paths before, it hardly could be. If I have fallen into error, it is that of a relatively inexperienced editor, not a bad faith one.

More importantly, I thought I should inform you that I have removed some material from the "criticism" section of Supreme Court of New Zealand that was added by you, based on the same concerns of direct quotation or close paraphrasing being used without proper in-text attribution. I have added the appropriate templated message on the talk page. I am a little concerned at finding another example of this from material you have added. I hope you will ensure you don't do this again and review any other instances of this that you think you may have already added in other articles. Neljack (talk) 08:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you on the QC's comments. I was intending to rework that part in, as well as possibly some of the other stuff, when I had the time. But if you get there first that's all for the good. Thanks, Neljack (talk) 21:16, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

I've just seen your comment on Talk:Supreme Court of New Zealand and want to apologise for giving the impression that I was threatening you with a block. The message was actually automatically generated by placing Template:Cclean on the talk page, as WP:Copyright violations says to do when removing material from an article for copyright reasons. I don't think I even read the message and I certainly never thought there was any question of you being blocked. Also, thanks for adding back in some of the material - it's good stuff and looks fine now. Regards, Neljack (talk) 04:46, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:DSC 2665 at Wellington.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:DSC 2665 at Wellington.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Eeekster (talk) 04:52, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mister Pip (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lloyd Jones (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) 12:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree files

See Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 October 24#OTRS pending since March. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:31, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:NZR K class 919.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NZR K class 919.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:34, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:New Zealand DSJ class locomotive in Picton.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:New Zealand DSJ class locomotive in Picton.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:17, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Tranz Metro 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:

from [[Wellington Regional Council]] rates, and 30% or $24.13m from [New Zealand Transport Agency]] public transport funding.<ref name="annual report">{{cite web|url=http://www.gw.govt.nz/assets/
|}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:31, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is the flag im promoting and as a nzer some on here ive never seen

why does this keep being removed? it is being promoted i belive some of the others need to removed as well if that is the case — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevymtnz (talk • contribs) 06:18, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some others do need to be removed, because like yours they're uncited. --LJ Holden 22:20, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Auckland EMU mock-up, Auckland waterfront, 12 June 2012.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Auckland EMU mock-up, Auckland waterfront, 12 June 2012.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

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

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:02, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Elections and WP:COI

I know you have a long history on Wikipedia and have contributed tremendously. But given that you're an active election candidate, you might want to step back a bit from editing pages for politicians and the electorate you're contesting. While the edits you've just made to Russel Norman and Rimutaka (New Zealand electorate) are good and entirely uncontroversial, the fact that you're doing them might not be, and party hacks won't bother to check the facts before leaping to conclusions about your integrity. Historical information can wait a couple of weeks, surely? --IdiotSavant (talk) 11:20, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. --LJ Holden 11:25, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of political parties in New Zealand, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Parker. 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) 11:19, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of named passenger trains of New Zealand, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palmerston. 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) 09:51, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Economy of New Zealand, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Māori. 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) 09:17, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Taxation in New Zealand, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Inland Revenue Department. 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) 09:02, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[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 Robert Muldoon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Wild. 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 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Republicanism in Barbados, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph. 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, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Helen Clark

added a link pointing to Edward Stafford

Shipping Corporation of New Zealand

added a link pointing to Federation of Labour

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Pair of reds.JPG

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pair of reds.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. —innotata 05:24, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:New Zealand Republic Handbook.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:New Zealand Republic Handbook.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

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

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 13:46, 2 October 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) 13:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 6 December

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Marsden Point Branch page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sir William McAlpine...

...maintains he was born in January 12th 1936!! I help on his Fawley railway, and know him..

Ok. My edit was to remove an irrelevant sentence (which was a dig at him for having his own railway). --LJ Holden 00:45, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]