User:23skidoo/Archive12

Welcome to the Archive! Please do not edit this page.

If you'd like to leave me a comment, a criticism, a question or whatever please Click here.

Archive: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14

Regarding this edit summary...

Please avoid using abusive edit summaries as per Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Thanks and happy editing. --Abu Badali 16:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Your question on The Starlost page

Hi again 23skidoo. Just wanted to let you know that I posted a response to your question about syndication and here [1] is a quick way to get to it. I hope that it helps and that your Wikibreak was a good one. MarnetteD | Talk 14:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Notability

I see that you are a Wikipedia Administrator who is also against notability. I am debating putting this userbox on my userpage as well, and have already joined the inclusionists. I am curious to hear your opinions on this matter. Yours, Smeelgova 09:53, 23 October 2006 (UTC).

OK, you're not against notability, just have some interesting opinions on it. Since there's not much elaboration on the Category:Wikipedians against notability page, I would like to hear some more. Precisely why did you decide to put this userbox on your userpage? I am leaning more towards putting it on mine, but I am also curious as to why so few Wikipedians have done so, so far. Yours, Smeelgova 21:24, 23 October 2006 (UTC).

OH, and by the way, I though you were against notability, because that's the name of the category, Wikipedians against notability, lol. Yours, Smeelgova 21:29, 23 October 2006 (UTC).

Perhaps renaming it would be better than deleting it. It is useful to note the other editors who have placed this userbox on their userpages. I think I will do so as well, and then I will consider what name would be more appropriate to rename the category...Yours, Smeelgova 22:47, 23 October 2006 (UTC).

Well, if you agree with the message inside the userbox, perhaps you and I should both add it, and then simply rename the category to something like "Wikipedians who think notability is not a popularity contest but an issue of verifiability", or something like that. I think I shall do this. Yours, Smeelgova 22:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC).

Liaquat Ali Khan

I have written an article regarding Liaquat Ali Khan, a prominent leader for the Pakistan movement and the First Prime minister of Pakistan. Although it has recieved a "B" rating but that was prior to addition of the criticism and legacy section and the provision of five more references. I believe the article deserves a higher rating since it fills all the requirements for a Good Article and easily be upgraded to a Featured Article. It has relevant and tagged images, ample and very credible references, presents an unbiased view and is well written.

It would be great if you could review and point out the mistakes and give it a proper rating.

Article: Liaquat Ali Khan

(Gambit pk 16:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC))

Possible use of color

Glad to have you back and active!

In one of my tennis articles (World No. 1 Tennis Player Pre-ATP Rankings) I'd like to be able to use the color red for a couple of words in one of the sections, ie, something like the severely edited version below:

World's No. 1 Player, number of years, or co-No. 1 (in red):

5 Don Budge, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1941, 1942
3 Ellsworth Vines, 1932, 1935, 1937
3 Bobby Riggs, 1941, 1946, 1947

The years in boldface would be the ones I'd like to change to red -- is there a relatively simple way to do this, or am I going to have to use either italics or boldface? Thanks! Hayford Peirce 01:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Yup, that's exactly what I thought would probably be the answer, but I wanted to check it out with you first. I've now redone the section in question, using boldface for a couple of years, and it looks pretty good.... Hayford Peirce 05:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

The Saint in New York

Interesting comments. I suppose I'll have to reread it sometime -- you've made it sound better than I recalled it being. Will you try to work some of those comments into your article about the book? It's SO hard to do interesting working within the Wiki rules....

Also, is this the book in which "The Big Fellow" turns out to be the guy who brings in the Saint in the first place? That's always (to me) an infuriating plot twist. Also, is this book in which Charteris falls into terrible imitiations of Hemingwayesque prose at times? Hayford Peirce 17:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Audrey Hepburn

I wouldn't say its inconsistent - the objection to templates for actors is the same as for Films by Actor categories. An actor's article should have a filmography where the titles will all be linked anyway, so a template offers no obvious advantage. Hepburn didn't actually make that many films for someone with a 40 year career, but if we allow a template for her, we can't object when someone creates one for John Wayne (172 films) or Christopher Lee (227!). And as I said, the blurb for The Longest Day claims it has "42 international stars", which is a lot of templates. JW 11:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Re

Do you have an example so that I know what you're talking about? I'm just curious. K1Bond007 18:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

It is a valid concern, however. I always thought it should have been done by categories. I debated this a while back and I was successful in getting one major director's template deleted as clutter (although I can't remember who and I believe it was recreated not long after), but I'm not sure what the answer is. You're either gonna end up with a lot of categories or a lot of templates and frankly for something like this that doesn't matter how it's listed (except by date) I'd rather it be a lot of categories. Something like Bond where sequential order matters, it should be a template since there is more emphasis on navigation. This thing will work itself out. I don't believe Bond is any danger here. I'd say the Blake Edwards one needs to be deleted first or moved to a category. K1Bond007 21:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I almost added my input. I had it written up as neutral, but decided to not get involved - that what I was going to propose may have been silly. The fact is something like that shouldn't be decided by TFD. But as I was going to note, the template would have been deleted, a category would have been made, CFD would have deleted that for the same reasons and then the cycle would have begun again. They need to clarify what can be a template and what can be a category for situations like this or none at all. K1Bond007 17:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VI - November 2006

The November 2006 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 21:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Modesty Blaise

Thanks for correcting my error about the Souvenir Press Books. I only saw them for the first time in London in September. I have replied to your comment on the talk page re categories. I have been around on WP for a year but even though I have been a Modesty Blaise fan for decades, I have only just got around to looking at the articles. I am not planning to do anything major like a new category in a hurry. --Bduke 23:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Klondike Days

I too am disappointed in the discontinuous of the Klondike Days. It was a great experience for people of all ages. I'm not sure what message they are trying to get across.... that they just don't care how or if young people learn about the past? There needs to be a connection between generations and one way for that connection has just been taken away. I makes me rather sad if I must say so. Oh well it seems everyone has given up on the youth. I do not think them a lost cause.

Regarding your comment on User:Chris is me/Notability hurts

The userbox, I thought, was supposed to be against WP:N, saying that deletions jusdged by popularity (Notability) instead of an objective criterion like verifiabiliy are bad. So a user stating that a user thinks WP:N deletions hurt wikipedia would typically be against notability. -- Chris chat edits essays 05:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your comment on Talent (Sitcom)

I have read your comment on correcting The Royal Family mistake on my article Talent (Sitcom) and I have corrected the mistake. Thank you for your support and help with this article and if you have any more to say just put it and I'll get back to you.

hello, information

hello 23skidoo I'm a user of italian wikipedia, and I want to fix my edit counter, I read this page but I don't see anythig, could you fix my User:Dario vet/monobook.js so I can look to my editcounter...If you answer to me, please write here or here --Dario vet 11:38, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

re Main Bond article

Good luck trying to prove the renewed interest. Book publishers rarely if ever post numbers (given your profession, I'm sure you're aware). If you got a source then I guess go for it. I don't know though. For the articles that I actually took time to separate from the films, I noted the intros in the publication history. Late 80s editions of Fleming's previously had intros by Anthony Burgess. Those are noted in the publication history too. -- As for the main article, well I don't care. I haven't read it in a long time and I disagree with the amazing amount of film bias even though it may be (understandably) the most popular form of Bond story telling. K1Bond007 03:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Well I expect a heightened level of sales over the norm due to the film. They didn't showcase them with the Brosnan films because none of the Brosnan films were based on an Ian Fleming novel. They had their own novelizations. It'll be interesting to see what they do for Bond 22 seeing as it is an original story and there is no adult continuation novelist except for the current unnamed 2008 one-off novelist. I doubt they'd ask Higson as the film series conflicts with the sort of conceit Higson and IFP are going for with YB. K1Bond007 04:45, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Survey Q

Have you ever been to the southern hemisphere? Respond here Deadline for entries is December 15th, PST. AstroBoy 03:26, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

The Book of Bond

Hi Skidoo! It was a shot in the dark (to use another film reference). Feel free to revert; as long as it's in "Books about film" that'll have to do. Cheers, Her Pegship 17:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Eva Green AFD

Why don't you mention it at the BLP noticeboard?? --SunStar Net 15:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Casino Royale

Well I had pretty high expectations - so much so that towards the end of the wait I thought I was going to be let down. Not the case, however. Clearly one of the best entries in the series. I could probably even say the best, but I'm not ready to say where it goes on my list just yet. Same goes for Craig. I thought he was outstanding, but I'm not ready to concede that he's better than Connery. It's just too early. I need to let it all sink in, but yeah, he could very much be better (hey, at least I can say I supported him from the start - hell my user page is proof of that since he was announced over a year ago now). I've actually seen Casino Royale twice thus far and I'm thinking about going again in early December if I get day off with not much to do.

I don't really see any plot holes (those that need to be cleared up in this film, anyway - ex. Mathis). If you want to go into detail, send me an email. I'm gonna be out of town for the next couple days - so that and it would probably be appropriate to keep the spoilers out of here. :P K1Bond007 07:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

My theater was so packed the first time I saw the movie that I just sat and waited. It's definitely there as Zencat noted on my talk page. Nothing special about it though. K1Bond007 03:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

EXODUS7

When you have a moment, can you please take a look at this editor? He has apparently been spending his Thanksgiving day on an editing spree across Wikipedia. Some of his edits have just been strange (see: [[2]]), others just plain vandalism (see: [[3]]), and none of them have been explained in any way, with an edit summary, or message on the talk page. I have slowly been going through and reverting his edits, but there are a lot of them. He needs a strong message about vandalism. Thanks. ---Charles 23:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick action on this. I'll keep an eye out for him. ---Charles 23:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Doctor Who TVM: Out of the Ashes

"In an interview broadcast on the CBC in Canada in 2005, a representative of the Doctor Who Information Network referred to the film by the title Out of the Ashes"

I was looking for the source of this quote but managed to find it by other means. I believe the source of this is "The Planet of the Doctor" documentary from the CBC. Nevermind.

Soldeed

Today is Tonight

Hi, Thanks for adding to the Harlow page and creating a T.I.T. (lol) article. As you will see I've done a whole lot a work on her page too. Thanks again! PatrickJ83 21:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh lucky you! Actually the reason it wasn't made into a film during Harlow's lifetime is that she wrote (or ghostwrote, actually) it during her salary strike from MGM during '34. When she went back to work (her first film back on the set was Girl From Missouri) she tried pitching it, but her stupid stepfather had pitched it without her knowledge to other studios and this was in violation of Harlow's contract, and thus her dream was dashed. :( PatrickJ83 02:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

User:86.31.57.108

Hi! Just letting you know, I've reduced your block of User:86.31.57.108 to 24 hours - it might be a dynamic IP address, so we don't want to risk blocking a real user that might get assigned the address in the future. --Tango 22:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Hen fap

Seems like an odd sort of vandalism. I'm so out of touch these days that I don't know if it means anything (however stupid) or not. If not, it seems like an odd sort of mania to indulge in. And, of course, equally aberrant even if it does mean something! Cheers! Hayford Peirce 22:34, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Saint Update and Vandalism

There are sure some weird ppl lurking around! I ran across the "salt and pepper collector" a while ago, can't remember where, but it made me stop and think, hehe.... As for the Saint, I just read your plot summary and, as you say, it, also, sounds weird. As if he hadn't written a bunch of earlier books. Or had forgotten them. Or just decided he wanted a new start. If the book had taken place off Florida, say, 3 years later, I'd say it was because he wanted to shift stuff to capture the American readership (when he was more or less living in the USA) but this seems too early for that. Strange.... Hayford Peirce 04:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

As a semi-retired writer myself (because I can't sell my novels anymore, hehe), I would say from my own experience and that of other writers I know that Charteris was probably recycling material he had previously written and couldn't get published. Somewhere every writer has 60,000 words or so that he he *loves* but couldn't see into print. So, several years later, he regurgitates them in slightly different form. And, lo and behold!, there they are in a brand new book -- for which he has been paid! Hayford Peirce 04:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hmmm, that's interesting. I had no idea that he was beginning his recycling and collaborating so early in his career. Lucky him! If I had a team of script writers and comic strip writers coming up with story line for me I'd still be writing myself these days. The only thing that keeps me from doing it is the total lack of ideas.... Hayford Peirce 18:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  - Ah! Hayford Peirce 20:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Mall Guideline

Hi, I saw you posted a comment today on a shopping mall AfD. Your comments would be greatly appreciated at WP:MALL where we are trying to create guidelines for which malls are deserving of an article. Thanks! Edison 20:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandal

There's a guy named User:Smurfman1 who has been vandalizing the Phillips Academy article for about a full day now -- I've reverted several times, and I think some other people have also, but he keeps coming back. Is there anything you can do about it? Thanks (I'm an Exonian myself, but even so!) Hayford Peirce 17:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! But Smurfie is a tough guy. He instantly set up another account and taunted the admin. who banned him from the first one. Now he says he's off to Bio class but will resume his activities when he returns. Good grief, the way some people get their kicks! Cheers.... Hayford Peirce 19:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Hehe, the Empire strikes back! Well done! Hayford Peirce 21:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't delete this, I'm appologizing

Let me clarifye some things. One, I'm not in elementary school I just let my immature side control my decisions for a moment, I don't usually act so dumb. Two, I'm using a computer in the world's largest secondary school library, so don't diss it. Three, while this is the last vandalism I'm going to perpetrate, I cannot stop the rest of Exeter Academy from doing so, so if you see vandalism on the Andover page, don't automatically assume it's me. Send this message to the rest of the peolpe "watching" the Andover page, so that they know not to waste any more time. The last Smurf 19:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, he sent the same thing to the other Admin. who blocked him. He can't seem to decide whether he's at St. Pauls or Exeter, however. Probably Exeter, I would say -- what do Paulies care about Andover? If you could block ALL of Exeter's library's use of Wiki, THAT would grab their attention, hehe. Maybe even impel them to find the idiot. When I was there, around 1957, there was another idiot who cut up his chair every Saturday night when they showed first-run movies in the gym. The school paper called him "The Mad Slasher" (after "The Mad Bomber" of NYC of the time. The Dean and other officials went crazy trying to catch him, but never did.... Hayford Peirce 03:45, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Do what you will, but most vandalism on Andover's page is coming from the computer room (In the science center). Beleive it or not, most Exeter students vandalize the Andover page at least once during their time at Exeter. Frankly, I don't think anyone who works here would care, their too busy trying to stop kids from "bridge jumping". Besides most of the teachers here hate Wikipedia.

WP:FILMS Newsletter

The November 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Cbrown1023 22:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:GreenMansionsBook.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:GreenMansionsBook.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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.

Hi, I recently replaced your uploaded cover image with an image of the original cover of the book per User:Chick Bowen/Bad book covers. A recent cover like yours technically would not be acceptable under the "replaceable" clause of our fair use policy, since the books' original covers, title pages, etc. would be free. Thanks, and I was just letting you know that I did this. --QueenStupid 17:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not sure which part of my above comment contradicts the rules in the fair-use tag. Err... could you tell me exactly which part it is? I apologize if I may have made you think the fair-use rules had changed. I pretty much compiled the phrases in my comment verbatim from User:Chick Bowen/Bad book covers. As for the orphaned image, I only tagged it {{subst:orfud}} if the image was only linked-to from the one article in which I had replaced the image. Anyway, thanks for pointing out my mistake. QueenStupid 22:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Deleted radio links

Yes, I looked at his contributions and it looks as if that's his particular hobby horse, I dunno why. As you've probably seen, I left a message on his Discussion page about talking this over and trying to get an explanation. I'm like you, though, my patience is sure worn thin by obsessed characters like this. Unlike you, however, I don't have the powers of Good and Evil to combat them, hehe. In any case, I'll take care of the Nero Wolfe page, and will check on the others if you need reinforcements.... Hayford Peirce 22:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

One would think that an elementary, even vital step that the Big Fellows of Wikipedia would take would be to have some mechanism to notify ALL administrators, say, simultaneously that, for instance: "As of right now, 12:45 UTC, no commercial, copyrighted book cover scans will be allowed IF a free, pre-1923 cover is available. Here is the site where we explain this in more detail. Please visit it and familiarize yourself with these new, binding rules. Please make all future edits in accordance with these rules." Or is that too simpleminded to even be considered? In any case, as time passes, I have less and less faith in peole who edit from behind an ISP number -- everytime I see one now, I automatically (although frequently incorrectly) think: "Vandalism!" Hayford Peirce 22:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

If you check the discussion above there does appear to be a related Wikiproject in progress, so who knows? 23skidoo 22:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you are watching my talk page, but I posted a response to your inquiry about the person who is stating that there is an 'old-time radio' policy. --PhantomS 23:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

It looks as if User talk:67.117.130.181 is also doing the same thing to a bunch of radio links, for instance Dorothy Parker and the whole Algonquin Round Table articles. Don't you think it's time that your patience wore out and you took drastic measures? Mebbe not.... I'm a hothead by nature.... Hayford Peirce 03:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

One of my main reasons for getting people interested in the wikiproject radio proposal is to have a project devoted to preventing systematic vandalism like what's going on from those anonymous IPs. --PhantomS 03:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I appear to have been wrong about my above comments -- this appears to be someone else entirely who is indeed deleting a spam link to "walking tours" through the Algonquin hotel or some such. As the old saying by Dr. Johnson goes: "Edit in haste, repent at leisure." Hayford Peirce 04:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I asked on IRC for the ip to be looked at. Maybe he should receive a last warning? --PhantomS 07:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Spanish boyfriend (Enya).

Hi 23 Skidoo,

You asked about proof of enya's Spanish boyfriend referance.

I read the story where this was mentioned, it was by a journalist called Tony Clayton-lea, and it was published in The Times (UK) in June 1998.

Best wishes, Sindy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.232.79.139 (talk) 14:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC).

Interference in biographies

Hi 23skidoo, since my last over-ambitious message, I am now more in contact with wiki-reality and films project needs. This, however, is about a particularly abnoxious interference in some biographies. If you don't wish to get involved, please refer me to another administrator. The problem started when user Liam7, from Australia, decided that the mention of Pete Townsend in the Meher Baba article is sacrilege and after a lot of fuss we called for a vote and the matter is now under sock puppetry investigation (3 puppets). However, another related biography, the one of Francis Brabazon (Baba's poet - also Australian) starts now getting ravaged by the newly appeared IP 61.69.130.56 . Liam7 has already mentioned Brabazon and probably thinks he knows better than the previous editor, who also reported him, so it might be him again. IP 61.69.130.56 has removed pictures, categories, data and has made the article almost a useless stub (see [4]). I reverted once, but if this goes on, I don't wish to engage in further reverts. I am not asking you to play the role of a Check User clerk or anything similar. I just need, please, advice of what is best to do. Thanks. Hoverfish 15:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

VANDAL ALERT

I've recently reverted Vandalism edits by Dduvjfa9(Talk) on the Teletubbies page. Because of this (And a couple of other pages) I put up the Test2 template on his talk page. He then vandalised a couple of other pages, so I also put up the Baltantvandal template on his talk page. I'm alerting you that he may come back to vandalise other pages, and that if he does, I'll put up the Test3 template on his talk page. If he vandalises again after that warning, I'll then put up the Test4 template on his talk page. If he vandalises another page after that warning, I will alert you so he can be blocked. Please contact me if you have read this message.Hondasaregood 15:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you. The user(Dduvjfa9(Talk)) is currently inactive. If he keeps doing damage, I'll just keep placing warning templates on his talk page until he is blocked.Hondasaregood 08:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Your comments at [5]

Hi there! I couldn't help notice that, on the above AfD, you commented that "We can't have articles for every local disaster or accident, otherwise I'm going to go off an create an article called 1980 Saskatoon Queen's Hotel fire which is notable as causing the first-ever deaths of firefighters in that city's history." Well, I just want to say that, you've really got me interested now. Contrary to your beleif that this would only interest a local audience, such as yourself, I actually believe that this would make a great article, and I encourage you to really go out there and write it. Also, it may interest you to know, if you're not tracking discusion on the AfD (forgive me if you are), that Mike Halterman and Erikssond have both left comments on the AfD page saying that they, too, would like you to really go out and write it. So please do - it really would be greatly apreciated, and I'm confidant that it could become a very interesting article. Blood red sandman 19:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

That's unfortunate, but there remains some hope at the Saskatoon article. I may even try researching myself, if only to convince myself of the impossibility of the task unless you already know where to look. Blood red sandman 22:43, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006

The December 2006 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Trivial George Jones edit

Hi, could you take a look at the George Jones article and give us your opinion about the listing of Jones's hits about half-way down the article? It's "Songs In Top 100 Since 1955 — (In parentheses: weeks at #1, #2, or #3)[8]". I spent a certain amount of time putting this info in and formatting it, so I feel a certain proprietary interest in it, without, of course, feeling that it is sacrosanct or can't be improved. For a couple of months now, various other editors remove, from time to time, the section of the header that reads "(In parentheses: weeks at #1, #2, or #3)[8]". I feel fairly strongly about one part of this deletion -- that by doing so, they are removing a vital reference, ie, to a Joel Whitburn book that contains all this info. I think that this listing of his hits can't just be conjured out of the blue, so that the reference (and footnote) is essential. The portion of the header that reads "(In parentheses: weeks at #1, #2, or #3)" apparently upsets other editors, although none of them have actually told me why except to say that this info isn't needed. Maybe simply because it doesn't look very pretty the way it is formatted. I spent a long time trying to make this parenthetical remark look either smaller or on a second line below the main header but couldn't succeed in doing so. My own feeling is that these somewhat mysterious numbers in the list of hits should be explained. Others apparently feel that they are self-explanatory. If you would take a look at the list, and its header, and give us your judgment on the matter, I would be happy to abide by your decision -- it's not something I want to spend the next 5 years fighting about.... Thanks! Hayford Peirce 00:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks much for the George Jones fix! I spent a fair amount of time trying to do essentially what you did but for some reason I wasn't able to do it. What you did looks simple enough, however, now that I see what it is. I must have been having a couple of dumb days! Cheers! Hayford Peirce 17:21, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Dispute at User talk:76.170.239.56

Hmm... I checked the history of User:Dnyhagen and saw no official action taken against him (e.g. ban, RfC, etc.) so I wouldn't really consider his editing while logged out as sockpuppetry. I think the best course of action right now is strict enforcement of WP:NPA. If they (and by "they" I mean both parties concerned) can conduct themselves according to Wikipedia policy, then they should be allowed to continue to edit. If they can't, then enforcement of WP:NPA will take care of the problem. It seems obvious to me that neither side will agree with the other and further discussions directly between the involved parties is pointless and counter-productive. I would like to see them enter into mediation or allow the issue to be decided by the Wikipedia community at large by means of an RfC. If they keep making personal attacks, however, it won't reach that point. One or both of them will end up blocked or banned. SWAdair 07:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Seems to have gone quiet for now - keeping watch on a few pages. But the only edits appear constructive. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 09:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

List of recordings preserved in the United States National Recording Registry

You are one of several people who was instrumental in cleaning up my List of recordings preserved in the United States National Recording Registry page. This page was the first page I created and still remains the page that I have made the most edits to on wikipedia (95 edits). Thank you for your assistance. Since this page received so much more cleanup assistance than most of my other pages I am wondering if it was a focus article of a WikiProject Group. Do you know of any such designation? It would be helpful because I will be self nominating for admin tomorrow or Tuesday. Please reply at my userpage with any info you may have. TonyTheTiger 17:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello

I found you in the Wikipedia Administrators, This person keeps on putting a template up in the wrong section i left a note but he didn't listen. Someone else removed it, Plus i think denial is better than refuse so i don't know why he put it up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Armenian_Genocide Nareklm 03:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Rockin' through the rye

No. I hope somebody who knows about it will. There is another red link to it at harry Robertson (composer) - Kittybrewster 15:17, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Support of Wikibio stance

I read "I've created and contributed to a wide range of biography articles. I do not support the assessing of article subjects based upon their perceived importance. That is POV and has no place in Wikipedia." And I would like to offer my full support to that opinion. It rings true with me.--I'll bring the food 16:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I had no idea he'd been banned actually, thanks for pointing that out. I just assumed he was not interacting with me based on the fact he'd finally taken the hint that you shouldn't add original research and possible liable on living people to the alto article, i'd no idea he'd been banned. Would you please see if 216.197.242.102 is him? That editor is adding the same information as Jaiwills' was. I believe admins can check and he has said we haven't seen the last of him. He also may be the 64.* ip who was one of the last to edit the alto article. I reported the page for semi-protection but it was refused on the grounds of discriminating to IP's. I had no idea that it was possibly him logged out.--I'll bring the food 17:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikivacation

Have a great holiday -- and total relief from the disruptive antics of many of the Wiki denizens! I'll try to guard the fort while you're gone! Hope you have lotsa Saintly pleasure -- and also maybe a moment to sample of the goodies of Matt Helm. If I hadn't fairly recently read my way through the Helm canon I'd try it again and read a report on each book. But, being an encyl., I suppose that some things can wait a couple more years. Many cheers! Hayford Peirce 18:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Should start a new wiki category of Saskatonians living in Calgary

Geesh, there seem to be a zillion people on Wikipedia like you and me who were born in Saskatoon and currently live in Calgary. There should be a new wikipedia category just for us. (by the way, did you go to Aden Bowman Collegiate? I did, back in the 1970s. I'm asking because I saw you edited the Aden Bowman article page) Dzubint 22:35, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Maritan Chronicles

Thanks for your question. Not knowing the book directly I will just answer from principles and what the article says about the work. Personally I would charactorise it as both SS colections and an episodic novel. As such I would include it in the task force material. I tend to "try" to be inclusive in these things. Hope that helps. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 08:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Newsletter

The December 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Cbrown1023 00:13, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Film navigation

Hi, I've seen and commented to the message you put on the Talk:Angelina Jolie page, but I've also noticed a similar situation at Nicole Kidman which is ongoing and one at Jane Fonda that seems to have died down. Do you know where this could be addressed as a general style issue rather than discussing just on the Jolie page? I'm not familiar enough with raising issues like this to know how to approach it from a broader perspective. Thanks Rossrs 08:21, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Fransaskois

Allo, I was reading the wiki page for Fransaskois today, I noticed an editting comment posted by you saying that you're from Saskatchewan (Saskatoon, I see...) and that you've never heard anyone use the term Fransaskois. Well I am a Fransaskoise, currently residing in Saskatoon and very involved in the Fransaskois community here in SK. The term Fransaskois is anything but rare to me, us, and even the other cultures in my life. As a small town frenchie, and a Fransaskoise that has probably been to every french community in this province, and equally someone very well exposed to the other cultures in this province I am in no sense biast towards the term "Fransaskois" beein a popular term, I'd just say that I'm in a better position to state that it is commonly used. Even in my travels, other Canadians know Fransaskois' and/or what the term represents. Peace yo ps. Every second year the Saskatoon Folk Festival has a French pavillion. Check it out, there's good beer, music, plays, poutine and really sugar-saturated desserts ;)

A request for assistance

Would you support the concept of moving the Earhart "myths" to a separate page or article? The reason for my suggesting this is that the main article should be an accurate and scholarly work while the speculation and conspiracy theories surrounding the disappearance of Amelia Earhart are interesting, they belong in a unique section. Most researchers, as you know, discount the many theories and speculation that has arisen in the years following her last flight. Go onto the Earhart discussion page and register your vote/comments...and a Happy New Year to you as well. Bzuk 02:50 3 January 2007 (UTC).

BOLD AND THE BEAUTIFUL

Dear Sirs

I just wanted to tell you that we all here in Pakistan enjoy the BOLD AND BEAUTIFUL for many many years. It comes on STAR WORLD. Suddenly it has stopped from 1st January 2007. What has happened? We are all so disappointed and dismayed. There was no notice at all - just stopped! Please let us know if there is any problem or the timing has changed.

Will be grateful for a reply.

With best wishes for the New Year.

My e-mail is dastur@cyber.net.pk —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.65.197.187 (talk) 19:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VII - December 2006

The January 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 19:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

ISBN & matt helm

Howdy! thanks for the heads up. I always like learning something new. I've been working on the Novelinfoboxincomplete auto work list over in the Novel Project which is how I ended up in these infoboxes. Now the general rule of thumb that I use is if it was 1st published before 1975 I don't look to hard for an ISBN because I won't usually find one. That isn't to say there might not be a SBN or an ASSN. But since i'm only looking for ISBN's i don't go that far.

1. Your right the ISBN idea did start in 1967 and was official in 1970 isbn. My theory is that after it became official the ISO gave everyone a certain amount of time to impliment it which could be why I can find so many ISBN's after 1975. 5 years sounds about right to get 100's of publishers inline with it.

2. Now I'm going to pick on The Intimidators. I did some more research this morning and i still can not find the 1974 Fawcett ISBN but the 1976 reprint of the book did have an ISBN I also found the 1974 Cornet (UK) edition had an ISBN on it. Keeping with my 1975 rule of thumb I checked out the #16 The Terminators published in 1975 and it also has an ISBN. This all leads me to confirm the belief that 1974 fawcett edition really didn't have one.

Right now I'd love to get my hands on the actual book just to see. So I'm going to leave it as is for now. Any way good news in all my surfing this morning I picked up 3 more great websites for infobox info. Happy edits Jask99 19:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

And Chaos Died AfD

Prompted by the AfD discussion, Metamagician3000 and I did some work to turn the unencyclopedic essay there before into the start of a decent article. Now it has external hyperlinks and everything. If you'd like, you could take a look and see if it still merits deletion. Anville 16:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

STAR WORLD PROGRAMME bOLD AND THE BEAUTIFUL

PLEASE LET US KNOW THE NEW TIME FOR THIS PROGRAMME.

D DASTUR

SIGNED —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.163.109.110 (talk) 18:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC).

I have no idea what you're trying to ask. This isn't that type of a website. 23skidoo 01:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Question about biography infobox

Hi, I would like to put an infobox on the biography of GKÓ but I don't know which one I should pick up because he's a guitarist, a researcher, inventor and engineer. I hope you could tell me. Kind regards, Luis María Benítez 16:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

first edition paperback cover

I don't know how to post this. Do you want to?

http://www.geocities.com/bbergold/bond.html

thanks Bruce Bergold bbergold@yahoo.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.226.159.175 (talk) 17:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC).

Incorrect use of caps -- I think

Thanks for the heads-up on the Mad Radio Reverter -- I'll keep my eye out for changes. In the article about Noni I've just noticed many such sentences as this: "The brand, TAHITIAN NONI® noni juice brand, is produced and manufactured by Tahitian Noni International, the first company to bring noni juice to the market, in 1995. Although there are now some 300 companies marketing noni juice, Tahitian Noni International....etc." In other words, every time he/she uses the name of this particular brand, it's put in caps. I recall there was a very determined bunch of people who tried to get TIME MAGAZINE in caps because that's the way Time does it, but they were finally beaten down. What do you think of this Noni business? Also the registered thingee. This sounds like a company PR guy putting this stuff in to me. Is there a handy Wiki section I can quote when I change all this stuff? Thanks! Hayford Peirce 01:04, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Righto, thanks for the tips. The Noni article itself isn't spam, or at least not entirely, but I think there may be elements that have snuck into it. I dunno if I want to get involved in passionate arguments about an article I really don't give a hoot about. But I'll check out the manual of style. Hayford Peirce 01:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Page Histories

Is there a way to clear out page histories? (My user page's for example.) Kornfan71 01:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. Kornfan71 01:14, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Gosh I'm so lost. Where do I ask the higher-ups and what should I say?? Kornfan71 01:32, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Template request

Hi. Thanks for updating a bunch of Templates earlier today. If you have a moment, could you also work your magic on Template:William S. Burroughs? Thanks! 23skidoo 04:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Complete. If you want me to create a meta-navigation template for the novels wikiproject I'd be willing to help. Although, right now I need to be getting to sleep. --Dispenser 05:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

User talk:76.170.239.56#The Crime Club

Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I left a message for both of them at User talk:76.170.239.56#The Crime Club and left appropriate warning templates on both talk pages. I've been bending over backwards giving multiple chances to prove that people can conduct themselves appropriately when warned, but it seems that this might be a hopeless case. From this point on, no more talk-page-only discussions. From now on, it will be templates and noticeboards until the behavior is changed or the editors involved are blocked. Sheesh! LOL, oh well, thank you again. Happy editing! SWAdair | Talk 05:37, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Mysterious numbers

What are these weird new numbers in green or red that now show up in (at least my) watchlists after the Article name? For instance, I am +47 and you, I think, are +98. Some numbers are minuses.... Clicking on them doesn't seem to do anything. Hayford Peirce 19:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah. I guess that I just hadn't noticed them until now. Verra strange.... Hayford Peirce 19:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

In response to your request. Please note that in order to remain a neutral party in this situation, I am simply pointing you toward appropriate policy. I would rather not become involved in any libel dispute. I intend to focus solely on the flame war nature of the discussions. In order to remain neutral I'll have to give you the same advice I would give Dennis if he were to ask about how to handle libel, so here goes: First is a recognition that Wikipedia:Libel only says libel isn't tolerated. It doesn't give a resolution process other than contacting the foundation. The proper way to handle such a dispute on-wiki is to follow Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. Please note that the very first step listed for dispute resolution is to talk to the other parties involved. Keep in mind all the conduct and communication related policies (WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL, WP:EQ, etc.) when discussing the issue and be sure that you are abiding by those policies. Violating those policies at this first step would look bad if third-party assistance is needed later. The object should be to see if you can resolve the issue in a civil manner. If that doesn't meet with satisfactory results, then there are other options listed. Skipping that first step, though, would be a bad thing. The dispute resolution process should be followed step by step, making every effort to resolve things at the lowest level possible. ADVICE FOR ANYONE INVOLVED IN A DISPUTE: Avoid loaded words; comment on content and not the person; eliminate adjectives and adverbs where possible; if you must use an adjective or adverb, choose the softest / least-loaded one; do not make accusations that cannot be proven with a diff. SWAdair | Talk 07:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd had already seen his weird page. Geez! As Jimbo Wales said somewhere the other day, I forget where, maybe on his own page, half the people who contribute to Wikipedia are certifiable maniacs. This one particular guy is certainly the poster child for the article on Monomania -- if one doesn't already exist, it should! Hayford Peirce 16:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Recordings preserved in the National Recording Registry

You have contributed as an editor to the List of recordings preserved in the United States National Recording Registry. It is undergoing an overhaul according to the recent peer review that generated the following feedback. In addition to the changes there, it is undergoing stylistic changes that prevail at lists that have been selected as featured lists. Conversion to wikitable format began with 2002 today because most articles that reach featured list status are in this format. Feel free to convert additional years, add more columns, or add further details. Hopefully many of the editors who have helped edit this page to its pre review state will help improve it to a featured list quality level. I may not return to make further edits until next week. TonyTheTiger 21:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Niohe

User:Niohe has been frequently and repeatedly engaged in deleting relevant and valuable historical images from various articles, depite numerous warnings.

Some of User:Niohe's acts of vandalism:

Highshines 00:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

help

Hi, i need your help

One of your admin, Doc glasgow , is threatening me and blocking my account. We have a dispute in the definition on living person.

Please contact me for more information.

Thanks

Senatorto

Amelia Earhart

Thanks for your interest and your comments. Regarding that article, I feel like I had been pulled into a vortex -- I was just trying to make a couple of minor NPOV edits of no great consequence. As a matter of fact, I initially *agreed* with the lady who claimed that the first paragraph was too long. Sigh. One more example, I guess, of why all of us need to take a Wikivacation from time to time.... :) Cheers! Hayford Peirce 04:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the input on my talk page. If you would like to pursue it, I'll be happy (as time allows) to provide diffs which demonstrate that my postings were more than appropriate under the circumstances. In the meantime, so far as I know, the "issue" quickly settled down so why bother? Thanks again though. Gwen Gale 13:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Anyway so here is the diff wherein Hayford Peirce made the utterly unfounded, uninformed and careless accusation. So far as I know the issue has been resolved and there are no hard feelings on my part, I'm only providing this citation to show the basis of my response. Cheers to you both! :) Gwen Gale 17:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I had already Unwatched the Earhart page. Thanks for your brief intervention but as far as I'm concerned that's an issue that has been resolved and/or taken care of. And thanks for the explanation of the "protected" page stuff. If I *ever* become an admin. (sobering and bizarre thought!) I will take you into consideration and call myself "1 Mean Guy" -- that ought to get the vandals headed in my direction instead of yours.... Cheers! Hayford Peirce 17:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Unprotecting a page

I've just taken a look at Betacommand's discussion page and in spite of the fact that he's been asked *numerous* times to explain just *why* he's so busy unprotecting pages, all he says, over and over, is that there is/was a backlog of protected pages. In spite of numerous requests, though, he never says why this is *bad* or why it needs to be taken care of so urgently. Glad I'm not an admin. who has to worry his head about such vital matters, hehe.... Hayford Peirce 02:58, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

red link comments

Hi. Sorry for the late response, but I made some comments at Wikipedia_talk:Red_link#warning_not_to_arbitrarily_remove_red_links. I think there are significant improvements we can make to that page. --C S (Talk) 01:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

RE Market Mall SK AB

Hello I don't know what I was thinking. I got too excited about finding a picture I guess. I will be going to our Market Mall this P.M. and I thinks I will take the digital camera with me, and fix this little problemo

Thanks for your prompt pick up, that would have been embarassing to leave there.

-)

SriMesh (Talk) 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Tom Baker death report

Hi - do you have a reference for the doll magazine you read about Tom Baker's mistaken death in, or any other references to similar reports? If so please add it to his entry in the List of premature obituaries, which I am trying to add references to (as quite a lot of people seem to read it). Thanks! Ben Finn 19:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Nutana Suburban Centre

Hello there thank you for the update about WP:Not. I re-worded the article somewhat. I will have to go elsewhere for more info about Market Mall, so I can't do much else from home as of yet.

		Friendship Cookie Award
		Thank you for your helpful words of wisdom. You have been awesome!!!

SriMesh (Talk) January 29, 2007

WP:Films Newsletter

The January 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Nehrams2020 07:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Smiley Award

Feel free to place this award on your user page, as a token of appreciation for your contributions. If you're willing to help spread the good cheer to others, please see the project page for the Random Smiley Award at: User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award
originated by Pedia-I
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

--TomasBat (Talk) 22:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you block a vandal?

Hi, there seem to be a couple of vandals that have spent the last two or three days putting in inane stuff about catboners in the Phillips Academy article. I'm an Exie man, myself, but I hate vandals on general principles. The more recent of them appears to be User:24.147.209.246. I tried to protect the page but that doesn't seem to work.... Maybe you can *really* protect it. Danke! Hayford Peirce 01:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

BJBot

I really have no idea if it is a bug in the bot or something with Wikipedia. The bot just appends a warning to the text of your talk page and posts it, so I'm not sure if need to send a "This is a message" flag with the edit or not. I will look into it more and reply if I find anything. Thanks for the report! BJ^Talk 15:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

This has been fixed, it was in fact due to marking the edits as minor. BJ^Talk 23:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Prince (musician)

thank you for protecting the Prince (musician) article it was beyond control for regular editors to fix the vandalisms yuckfoo 01:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Novels newsletter : Issue IX - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 16:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The Artist (Prince)

The vandalism on Prince by Carsonauto will stop. he is my personal friend. He did it twice,once as a joke, but did it again by accident. I apologise on behalf of Carson.

The Starlost

Heya. You wouldn't happen to have any of the episodes would you? I'd like to create it an LOE (in the article) with screen captures, but I do not have access to the full series. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 16:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Mayerling

You know, I wondered the same thing as you. But if you enlarge the picture and look at it very closely, you will notice that recognisable in the background is Raymond Massey. In the foreground is Diana Wynyard. For additional confirmation, see the second picture from the series, http://www.operagloves.com/Superstars/AudreyHepburn/audreyhepburn-mayerling2.jpg which clearly shows the two aforenamed actors more clearly, together with Hepburn and Ferrer. With a bit more detective work, you will see that Massey and Wynyard are in Mayerling (http://www.tv.com/producers-showcase/mayerling/episode/218042/summary.html), but not in War and Peace.Cheers. Orbicle 16:56, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

BLP banner

I noticed that as well; issue raised here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Independent evidence for Apollo Moon landings

I noticed that you voted early on this, and wanted to let you know that the article has substantially grown (and will likely grow further) into a useful list of evidence for the Moon landings that has nothing to do with hoax sites. I'd like to invite you to take another look, and to consider changing your vote. Gravitor 19:55, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Simon Templar

Hey, hope you don't mind me moving the conversation here. Unfortunately, for the first three books, I was unable to dig up the first British editions. Here's the totality of my Abebooks picture findings for them: Meet - The Tiger, Enter The Saint, The Last Hero. The fourth book, Featuring the Saint, did turn up two images that purport to be the original British HCs (List, including other results). But they lack dustjackets (if they ever had them?) and so I really wouldn't be sure what use they'd be. As for the later novels (I really did just skip ahead to the late '40s, I get frusterated easily), the Wikipedia pages claimed the American editions were first, so I took their word for it. Even there, I think there were two other novels around that time that I couldn't find the first American editions for (But, of course, suddenly the British firsts were abundant... go figure). I'm going to keep poking around a bit and see what I can't come up with, though. Like I said, my methods really work best for 1950s+ novels. But hey, nothing like a good challenge! -- Antepenultimate 23:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Whoops! The fourth book is Knight Templar, my eyes must have skipped over that. Pretty weak findings for that too (Only one result...) and it's tiny to boot (though it could still make the 200px threshold, I think). -- Antepenultimate 23:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Help

Hi I'm new here on Wikipedia and not too sure how to report someone who broke the 3RR rule as User:SUIT did on the page Action figure and he is possibly a sock or meat puppet of User:Power level (Dragon Ball) He called me a dick and linked it to a page so he wouldn't get in trouble. Any help appreciated. User:OJHomer

I'll say it fast: I didn't break the 3RR rule, I reverted three times that's it, (How would a "new" user know about it in the first place), I ain't a sockpuppet- I've been editing constructively since August (Again, how would a new user know about sockpuppets if he's been here for barely a day?), and Power level was referring to the rule WP:DICK--SUIT^-n-tie 07:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Bad Bots

Hi! I just wanted to warn you that MetsBot has been messing with pages. The bot most recently screwed up my user page by playing with my user boxes. The bot can be turned off, but, only by administrators. That is why I am turning to you. Please Help!--Sportman2 03:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:TPol2003.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TPol2003.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that 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. Bob 07:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)