User talk:Bobby1011/Archive 2

Image Tagging Image:Convicts.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Convicts.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -SCEhard T 21:48, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you add a note about where the image was published, who drew it, or something to indicate its age? While it is clear that the subject is old, the drawing could have been made more recently. Thanks -SCEhard T 22:07, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, no problem, I will email the contact on the website about it. -SCEhard T 22:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Neutral point of view

I've copied your questions at Talk:Neutral point of view over to Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance)#Definition of terms. You should get assistance there. (In fact, someone has already responded.) jareha 22:20, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Australian as a native language

Thanks for letting me know. I've modified it somewhat. Happy editing, --cj | talk 10:54, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Convicts.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Convicts.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

I received a reply from the website and based on that I have listed the image as possibly unfree. -SCEhard T 20:26, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Newspaper article

Wow, Thanks for scanning that. What is the source of the scan (or the newspaper in question), i'm just going to source it on the image page. Agnte 11:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to know the name of the paper too. That's amazing. It's apparently not the Review of Reviews since that's mentioned as the source of the political cartoon, but I couldn't see a clue as to this paper's name. 65.33.156.96 14:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV tag

See my comments on the Argument from... talk page. I agree with you that some of the statements need to go as POV, and I feel that others need to go because they are unsourced. Jim62sch 14:46, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aboriginal Flag

Hi Bobby, you can find the discussion about the flag being under copyright at Image talk:Australian Aboriginal Flag.svg. (It was rather esoterically hidden elsewhere until just now, so thanks for making me find it again!) Any questions, let me know. From what I know about de: they won't be able to use it though. Cheers, pfctdayelise 06:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self

don't click here

DVD-Audio Draft

I'll move it. Can you go ahead and delete DVD-Audio/Draft? Thanks! --Analogdemon (talk) 02:03, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Praxis School

Hi Bobby. Could you be more specific as to what needs to be cleaned up in the Praxis School article?

--Bora Nesic 14:46, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly do not want to sound upset about you tagging my article, but if you were in fact knowledgable in the topic at hand, you would realize that the topic is itself very obscure in the overall field of philosophy. As such, it warrants minor entries in most encyclopedias, and not much information is readily availible. While I agree with your call for people to contribute and expand the text, I disagree with the cleanup tag. Hence I suggest that we enter a call for people to contribute to the topic in the discussion page and on the philosophy portal, and remove the cleanup tag. Best regards, --Bora Nesic 15:06, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minor caution regarding speedy taggings

Please be careful in placement of speedy tags on articles. Some editors create articles and then continue working on them to improve them from stub status. The case I'm referring to in particular is Harriet Walter. You placed a {{db-bio}} tag on the article five minutes after the article was created. In this particular case, the claim was that she is a British actress. The name was not familiar to me, so I checked to see if there was an entry for her at imdb.com. I was rather surprised to find that not only is she an actress but she's also a Commander of the Order of the British Empire. She's certainly notable enough to have an article on her, even if the article hadn't quite yet shown that. I don't disagree that as the article stood, it appeared there was nothing notable. But, a quick check showed that the article's subject is indeed notable. In this case, it would have been better probably to ask the original author to flesh the article out more, or addd just enough yourself to make it obviously about someone notable (for instance, adding mention of being OBE). All the best, --Durin 14:49, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Owl digestion

Why did you tag Owl digestion as a speedy? —Viriditas | Talk 04:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The article should be merged with Owl, I agree. —Viriditas | Talk 06:38, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stub reminder

Hey, just a friendly reminder - stubs go on the bottom on an article. (P.S. I plan to visit your country next year!) CrypticBacon 07:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Casca Rufio Longinius

Hi, Bobby. Thanks for your enthusiasm, but I think you may have overreached a bit in branding Casca Rufio Longinius not only for deletion, and not notable, but also a hoax. I took the liberty of fleshing out the page somewhat, and removing your notice. Hopefully that's all right with you. GRuban 22:10, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]