User talk:Andrewjlockley/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

File permission problem with File:Missbimbo1.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Missbimbo1.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

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

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-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 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 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 uploaded by following this link. 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. NW (Talk) 00:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Missbimbo2.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Missbimbo2.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

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

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-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 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 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 uploaded by following this link. 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. NW (Talk) 00:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Missbimbo1.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Missbimbo1.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:15, 15 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ian¹³/t 17:15, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Missbimbo2.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Missbimbo2.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ian¹³/t 17:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Missbimbo1.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Missbimbo1.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

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

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-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 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 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 uploaded by following this link. 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. Ian¹³/t 17:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Missbimbo2.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Missbimbo2.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

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

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-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 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 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 uploaded by following this link. 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. Ian¹³/t 17:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Anthropocene extinction event

An article that you have been involved in editing, Anthropocene extinction event, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthropocene extinction event. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Polargeo (talk) 11:12, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Brand on Geoengineering

Did you see Stewart Brand's recent TED talk? Viriditas (talk) 00:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks I have sent that to the geoengingeering group. Andrewjlockley (talk) 10:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

No consensus means DO NOT DELETE

Your interpretation of no consensus as not redirecting or merging goes well against majority opinion. Polargeo (talk) 14:11, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I never said that. See headline above! Andrewjlockley (talk) 12:22, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

AJL

^{(I've copied this text from Talk:Holocene extinction event since it seems entirely directed at you. --Explodicle (T/C) 16:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC))}

AJL if you want a section on Anthropocene why don't you make one? Don't just hijack the article. Polargeo (talk) 15:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

You voted for a merge so you could merge the content properly instead of delete/redirect. Andrewjlockley (talk) 16:21, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Not stalking

Andrew. I just checked your edits to see if you have been doing more extinction stuff. I found your addition on Roman_Britain including intro of rabbits. How can you add a subsection to an article and question your own source at the same time? It takes minutes to check these things and find out that they are wrong. Dumping incorrect info is not helpful. I feel like I might as well not bother saying this to you because it will make little difference to your additions. On another note I have added a bit to Pine Island Glacier outlining Duncan Wingham's recent paper (that was reported by BBC). Polargeo (talk) 01:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I had a source, it looked OK, but it wasn't a sci. paper so I tagged it. Happy to be checked. Do you have a better one that covers the issue?Andrewjlockley (talk) 19:23, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay I see Dougweller kindly corrected most of the errors. I have now finished the job. Polargeo (talk) 15:19, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, only human! Andrewjlockley (talk) 18:24, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Article Incubator

You supported: WP:AFD:ARSify
I thought you maybe interested in this: Wikipedia:Article_Incubator which will go live soon.
Your comments are very welcome. Ikip (talk) 20:40, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

using the same ref multiple times

Hi Andrew - to use the same ref multiple times you may first write <ref name=X>ref content</ref>. In subsequent usages, you may type <ref name=X></ref> or (I think) <ref name=X />, and that will link that passage to the same footnote the first passage used. In this way, you don't have to have several footnotes for the same article.

I used this to clean up Stratospheric sulfur aerosols (geoengineering) a litte, and (to warn you) actually then moved the article to stratospheric sulfate aerosols (based on my reading). Awickert (talk) 17:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't like using that approach as when the article gets hacked about the references fall to bits. Further, not all aerosols are sulphates, they go through transitional stages. The chemistry is pretty complex actually - completely beyond me (and , it seems, many who advocate the technique). I think you should check carefully whether 'sulphate' covers it all. Sulfur is much more catch-all.Andrewjlockley (talk) 17:37, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Entrepreneurs Bootcamp

You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

The article Entrepreneurs Bootcamp has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article, which appeared to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 13:06, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

list of scientists

If you are around, which you don't appear to be right now you may be interested in Talk:List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming and the recent AfD which is being reviewed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming (3rd nomination) :) Polargeo (talk) 17:20, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. AfD now closed. I'm still 'around', but not actively editing at present. I check my messages. Anything else exciting I should be aware of? Broadly speaking, I don't think it's the 'wiki way' to always hang around. You dive in, build some stuff, bravely defend it whilst it stabilises, then leave for a while. I'm sure I'll be back again in due course. Andrewjlockley (talk) 02:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Ref?

Re [1]: Your ref does not compute - I suspect its a copy and paste problem. Please fix it. Thanks! --Stephan Schulz (talk) 16:29, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

sorted thx Andrewjlockley (talk) 16:34, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Better, but still broken. Take a look at the actual ref 100 in the ref list. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 16:37, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of Coldplay tribute acts

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on List of Coldplay tribute acts requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 99.149.84.135 (talk) 15:01, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Coolplay

The article Coolplay has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Assertion of notability is not verified; unable to find coverage from reliable sources

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. snigbrook (talk) 15:30, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Coolplay

A tag has been placed on Coolplay requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ArglebargleIV (talk) 17:08, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Simon Coulson

The article Simon Coulson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I cannot find any reliable sources for this person. All the google references seem to be about various Internet based "get rich quick" schemes. Lots of advertising but nothing independent.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. noq (talk) 18:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Coolplay

I have nominated Coolplay, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coolplay. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of List of Coldplay tribute acts

I have nominated List of Coldplay tribute acts, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Coldplay tribute acts. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of internet marketing gurus

A tag has been placed on List of internet marketing gurus requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. HJMitchell You rang? 21:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Armand Morin

A tag has been placed on Armand Morin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Drdisque (talk) 21:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of internet marketing gurus

The article List of internet marketing gurus has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Per WP:DIRECTORY. What's the need for a list of names under the ill-defined heading of "gurus"? For added good measure, the majority of them are red-links.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Favonian (talk) 21:47, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Armand Morin

I have nominated Armand Morin, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armand Morin. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Drdisque (talk) 22:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Simon Coulson

I have nominated Simon Coulson, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Coulson. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. noq (talk) 11:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Adam Ginsberg

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Adam Ginsberg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Adam Ginsberg and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Lots42 (talk) 12:16, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

It's not advertising because I have no commercial contract in this regard. I'm just looking to improve coverage of gurus, porn 2.0, online dating and other fields considered too distasteful for the genteel community of wikipedia! :-) Andrewjlockley (talk) 16:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

November 2009

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Adam Ginsberg. Please use the {{hangon}} template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's talk page. Thank you. Favonian (talk) 12:24, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I was accused of spamming, which clearly indicates an abject failure to properly research. I've never rmvd a speedy tag for any other reason. Andrewjlockley (talk) 13:15, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of List of internet marketing gurus

I have nominated List of internet marketing gurus, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of internet marketing gurus. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Favonian (talk) 16:59, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Adam Ginsberg

I have nominated Adam Ginsberg, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Ginsberg. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. DGG ( talk ) 01:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Leytonstone, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Grim²³★ 18:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I was a bit hasty with the automated message. I know the article should reflect that Leytonstone isn't a typical "leafy" suburb, but I there must be another way of achieving this with stronger sources. Grim²³★ 01:26, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I've improved the sentence and added refs. ThanksAndrewjlockley (talk) 08:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles For Deletion

This is a friendly notice of the following:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephan Schulz‎

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikiproganda on Global Warming

I thought you might be interested in these votes. Regards, ~ Rameses (talk) 13:35, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you - I am William M. Connolley (talk) 13:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Thx, commented Andrewjlockley (talk) 12:14, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Karen Franklin

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Karen Franklin, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.karenfranklin.com. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:15, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Karen Franklin

A tag has been placed on Karen Franklin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 22:47, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

If the subject returns your email, feel free to direct her to Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. As matters stand, however, we cannot host content copied directly from a source which asserts a copyright incompatible with CC-BY-SA. - 2/0 (cont.) 01:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

How much changed does it have to be?

It's not a matter of how much change needs to be done, but the matter that copyrighted content shouldn't be copied at all without permission. You are free to take information from her website, but not copying word per word (however, this would also create another problem, as information should be referenced to third-party sources, like a news article, rather than content written by the person themselves, like their own websites). Anyways, I have replied to your message on my talk page here. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:19, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing has some advice. I would also like to second the request that the article be recreated relying primarily on sources besides the subject's own bio page. - 2/0 (cont.) 02:40, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of List of Tiger Woods' alleged affairs

I have nominated List of Tiger Woods' alleged affairs, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Tiger Woods' alleged affairs. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. RadioFan (talk) 01:57, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Karen franklin

A tag has been placed on Karen franklin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Raziman T V (talk) 09:56, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

Sorry if I was too fast. Please add material to the page showing that the subject is worthy of inclusion in wiki -- Raziman T V (talk) 10:03, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

If I hadn't been fighting off 2 speedies in 18 hrs I would have had it done by now. :-( Andrewjlockley (talk) 10:04, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Deletein of ADRECS

Hi Andrew, can you tell me why the ADRECS article should be deleted - the Claverton Web site where it sits is an independent site comprised largely of energy experts and professionals. It is at least an interesting idea, and if feasible highly significant.

Kind Regards

enginemanEngineman (talk) 21:25, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Because it's not WP:NOTABLE. It's just someone's idea. There's no backing for it, it's not under serious consideration by anyone significant and there are no papers published on it. It might be brilliant, but that's not grounds for inclusion in WP. It seems like a lot of your stuff gets deleted, so why don't you spend some time working out where you're going wrong and change? Andrewjlockley (talk) 17:08, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Bill Barker (police officer)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Bill Barker (police officer). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Barker (police officer). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles in the topic area of climate change are under general sanctions due to continued disruptive editing

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Global warming, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. - 2/0 (cont.) 01:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Andrewjlockley! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 317 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Tim Lenton - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 04:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Graciela Chichilnisky

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Graciela Chichilnisky, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.columbia.edu/~gc9. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 12:35, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Graciela Chichilnisky

A tag has been placed on Graciela Chichilnisky requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. armagebedar (talk) 06:43, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I have deleted the page because it's an unambiguous copyright violation of her personal website and the Columbia bio. I was initially going to decline the A7 tag, but it's a clear copyright violation. Please do not copy-paste content from other sources to Wikipedia.—SpacemanSpiff 08:53, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Cartel Client Review

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. PhGustaf (talk) 00:59, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Your article does little but to assert that the company are a bunch of crooks. It also does nothing to assert the notability of the company, which is grounds for speedy deletion as well. PhGustaf (talk) 01:14, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

see article tpAndrewjlockley (talk) 01:44, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at Cartel Client Review

Hi there Andrewjlockley! I saw that you added a {{hangon}} tag to a page which you created, Cartel Client Review. This is good, but in the process you removed the tag requesting deletion under CSD G10. Even though there is a hangon on the page, the deletion template should remain there. But don't worry, this doesn't mean that the page is going to get deleted. Make sure you edit the talk page of the page nominated for deletion, located at Talk:Cartel Client Review, administrators will look at your reason why the page should remain before they decide what to do. Thanks - SDPatrolBot (talk) 08:52, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Climate change feedback - invalid DOI

I think you introduced a reference to a cite doi of CO2 in the Chemical Weathering section of the above article - please replace that with a correct DOI for your ref if you have it still. RDBrown (talk) 07:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

removed, but don't have a new doiAndrewjlockley (talk) 18:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Prince Harry of Wales

Please review WP:BLP as to what is acceptable. Rodhullandemu 22:26, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Please don't revert without a proper explanation. Andrewjlockley (talk) 22:29, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Non-job

The article Non-job has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable neologism

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Eeekster (talk) 23:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Kingston upon Hull Comments

Check the link, and try to make your comments more encyclopedic in future. The reference you used was outdated for a start.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=981142 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Radiator4612 (talk • contribs) 11:59, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

"Crap Town"

Consensus several years ago was that this reference wasn't suitable for inclusion; please see this entry on the Hull article talk page. Northumbrian (talk) 02:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 04:46, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of William Francis Melchert-Dinkel

I have nominated William Francis Melchert-Dinkel, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Francis Melchert-Dinkel. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Fences&Windows 00:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Efficient grease

I have nominated Efficient grease, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Efficient grease. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. mboverload@ 23:48, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of article

Hello. An article you created, titled "Epic boobs girl" has been deleted per Wikipedia's policies on speedy deletion and biographies of living persons. Please see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Feel free to contact me if you have questions. --KFP (contact | edits) 22:00, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

• Hi! Although the article was moved from the original title, I believe BLP concerns still apply, and we need much more substantial sources showing the actual notability of the subject of the article. I'm not willing to undelete the article, but if you want more opinions on the matter, I suggest you list the article at deletion review. --KFP (contact | edits) 20:56, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Are you having a laugh? How much more notable that a major national newspaper can you get?! Please reinstate the article and nominate it for deletion, in the manner in which you should have handled this in the first place. Thanks.Andrewjlockley (talk) 01:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
    • Hi. As I said, I am of the opinion that BLP concerns apply. More and better sources are needed for this type of article. And no, I'm not having any laughs over this. --KFP (contact | edits) 02:57, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
      • Can you give me an example of a source which is 'better' than a major national newspaper? And how, exactly, do you suggest I can write or title the article in such a way as to escape your apparently arbitrary lumping of this anonymously-titled piece into a BLP? Andrewjlockley (talk) 01:55, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Andrewjlockley. You have new messages at Talk:Geoengineering#Citation_question.
Message added 20:16, 9 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Letting you know, as you were the editor who added the citation.--SPhilbrickT 20:17, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of article

Hello. As I said, I believe WP:BLP applies even though the person was not named in the last revision(s) of the article (particularly as it appeared to be about a child). A single blog post (even if it's by a journalist affiliated with a major newspaper) is not enough in this type of case. Also, as I said earlier, you can request undeletion at deletion review. Some somewhat similar Internet memes that concern living people certainly do meet Wikipedia's policies for inclusion but this article does not, I think. --KFP (contact | edits) 23:25, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Also, in case you didn't see it, the proposed deletion reason was "This article does not seem to be noteworthy. It reads like it sets a legal precedent. When in reality it is about a Press Complaints Commission ruling. The PCC being a regulatory body for British printed newspapers and magazines, and not a court of law. The "Implications of the case" section is nonsense too. The PCC ruling does not have any implications for future privacy cases since the PCC is not a court of law, and does not hear such privacy cases. If someone wanted to stop a newspaper printing some pictures then they would need a court injunction." This was not the reason for the deletion but you should probably take it into consideration when/if requesting an undeletion. Apart from that, the approach of the article to the issue seemed to be ok per se, but more substantial sourcing is definitely needed. --KFP (contact | edits) 23:43, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

I have already asked you to explain what more substantial source there can be that a major national newspaper, and the original PCC documents. For your information, I have already taken legal advice and the case does set a precedent.Andrewjlockley (talk) 01:31, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Space Race--Joint Lunar Program

Thanks for adding the excellent material on the proposed joint lunar program. I took the liberty of expanding what you added, based on the source, and created a separate section more in keeping with the chronology. Hope that suits. Apostle12 (talk) 00:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree it's hugely significant, leading me to reinterpret the political situation. My attempts to put it in the lead were reverted.Andrewjlockley (talk) 00:13, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Fertility testing

Please ensure you reference your articles in future; unreferenced content may be removed. Regards, Ironholds (talk) 16:21, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Tim Lenton

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Tim Lenton, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://www.uea.ac.uk/env/people/facstaff/lentont, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Tim Lenton and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Tim Lenton, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Tim Lenton with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Tim Lenton. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Tim Lenton saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Hut 8.5 22:12, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dan Magness

The article Dan Magness has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced BLP; no evidence of notability

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. GiantSnowman 19:17, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Michael MacCracken

The article Michael MacCracken has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. The-Pope (talk) 10:03, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

October 2011

Your addition to David Keith (scientist) has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. I have also found copyvio at at least one other article of yours which I will delete tomorrow. Please respond to this showing that you understand the problem and will work to fix it. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 21:10, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

• David Keith directly asked me to edit the article to restore balance. The additions were not a direct lift from any site. The other 'violation' was Tim Lenton, who I also know personally - and he of course did not complain either. I don't see any grounds for this block you are trying to put on my account. Andrewjlockley (talk) 21:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

This edit [2] was a direct copy and paste from [3] - are you saying it was just a coincidence? You also used material from [4] in the Michael McCracken article, removed cited text from it and left it with no inline citations and added 'references' which don't seem to reference anything. You cannot copy material from other sources into our articles unless they are clearly copyright free - and simple paraphrasing isn't enough. Your change to David Keith was not actually a revert it was a change that didn't replace the copyvio. Please read WP:CITE by the way and don't just add urls to an article. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 22:39, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

No, I used text Mike sent me, which I then edited, wikified and linked (exactly as I'm supposed to do). Please, just stop this. It's not productive. If you've got an actual problem with the content, please do point it out. Otherwise please leave this 'issue'. Thanks. Andrewjlockley (talk) 23:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC) PS Kindly stop removing text from pages I'm editing - at least until I've finished building the page and thus addressing the issues such as referencing which I'm already well aware of. Thx

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Bilking, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Civil law (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) 10:30, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Manorial waste, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Verges and Hedges (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) 10:36, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 15

Hi. When you recently edited The Great Global Warming Swindle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David King (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) 09:53, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Dead link in article 'Amir Siddique'

Hi. The article 'Amir Siddique' has a dead link that could not be repaired automatically. Can you help fix it?

Dead: http://press.homeoffice.gov.uk/press-releases/hate-promoters-banned-UK-named

• You added this in May 2009.
• The bot tested this link on 14 April, 16 April, 18 April and today, but it never worked.
• The bot checked The Wayback Machine and WebCite but couldn't find a suitable replacement.

This link is marked with {{Dead link}} in the article. Please take a look at that article and fix what you can. Thank you!

PS- you can opt-out of these notifications by adding {{Bots |deny=BlevintronBot}} to your user page or user talk page. BlevintronBot (talk) 06:11, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John Latham (physicist)

The article John Latham (physicist) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Monty₈₄₅ 18:25, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Move of Space mirror (anti-global warming measure)

That was a very bold move; could I ask on what basis you determined the title was incorrect, or where you discussed it? As you must have seen, a merger of the article with Space sunshade has been proposed; maybe you could post there, since the merger, if it's decided it's advisable, would be a better solution than the move, and since the criteria for the move presumably bear on the issue of whether it should be merged? --Yngvadottir (talk) 13:04, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Anti-global warming measure is not an accepted phrase. The correct word is geoengineering.Andrewjlockley (talk) 20:25, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Non-job

As you're the originator of the Non-job article, you may wish to be aware of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom#Non-job—A bit iffy (talk) 09:40, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

List of geoengineering papers

Hi, I wanted to let you know that I'm severely tempted to nominate your list(s) for deletion per WP:NOTDIR. Wikipedia is not a directory and whoever wants to look up such papers may find them at JSTOR or other such services. Items in a Wikipedia list should be notable on their own or have their own article but I don't see this in your lists of papers. De728631 (talk) 12:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. This is an extension of List of proposed geoengineering projects, which broke when the new content was added. It's a work-around, but it will kinda do for now, I think. Have you got another idea as to how to make this data available?Andrewjlockley (talk) 12:57, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of geoengineering papers for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of geoengineering papers is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of geoengineering papers until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of List of proposed geoengineering schemes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of proposed geoengineering schemes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of proposed geoengineering schemes until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 17:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Thanks for creating the List of proposed geoengineering schemes article back in 2009 and for creating the more recent articles List of geoengineering papers (part 1) and List of geoengineering papers (part 2). Despite the notion that the latter two article may be deleted at AfD due to their style and length, the work that went into them is impressive. Thanks for your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for the public. Northamerica1000(talk) 05:26, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I just formatted and uploaded the recent ones, though.... Andrewjlockley (talk) 08:41, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mycorrhizal network

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Mycorrhizal network requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Nathan Johnson (talk) 22:04, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dana al-Salem

The article Dana al-Salem has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Kelly Marie 0812 (talk) 05:06, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:WikiProject Geoengineering

Wikipedia:WikiProject Geoengineering, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Geoengineering and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject Geoengineering during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. RockMagnetist (talk) 22:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Alan Robock

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Alan Robock requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. reddogsix (talk) 22:02, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Familicide, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Depression (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) 12:12, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Karen Franklin

The article Karen Franklin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Placing this on behalf of another user who incorrectly added PROD without substituting it properly. Concern appear to be primarily whether the subject passes WP:GNG or other notability guidelines.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Safiel (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Florence Pugh for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Florence Pugh is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Florence Pugh until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Wgolf (talk) 15:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Florence Pugh

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Florence Pugh, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Wgolf (talk) 13:56, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

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) 17:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Plyscraper

The article Plyscraper has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Dictionary definition. No encyclopedic content.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. My Pants Metal (talk) 03:28, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Andrewjlockley. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Fill pack

Hello, Andrewjlockley. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Fill pack, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:57, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Andrewjlockley. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Launch48

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Launch48, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. wumbolo ^^^ 22:20, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Andrewjlockley. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Andrewjlockley. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Adam Ginsberg for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adam Ginsberg is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Ginsberg (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Edwardx (talk) 00:10, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Amir Siddique for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Amir Siddique is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amir Siddique until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Störm (talk) 15:39, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Dana al-Salem for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dana al-Salem is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dana al-Salem until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. - hako9 (talk) 16:11, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

January 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Martin Luther King Jr., you may be blocked from editing. We do not repeat content on BLP pages in "controversies" sections. The material is already covered in an appropriate section where it is properly contextualised. Cambial — foliar❧ 09:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Global Thermostat for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Global Thermostat is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Thermostat until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

May 2023

Please do not add or change content, as you did at The French Angel, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 20:41, 10 May 2023 (UTC)