User talk:Enayray

Talk to me.

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Enayray, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Charles (talk) 21:23, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your feedback

Thank you for improving Wikipedia!

David¹²¹⁷ 05:57, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWomen's Collaborative

WikiWomen Unite!

Hi Enayray! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative.

As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:

Liking the WikiWomen's Collaborative on Facebook and share your tips, projects, and connect with other WikiWomen
Join the conversation on our Twitter feed
Reading and writing for our blog channel

We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can get involved!

Can't wait to have you involved! SarahStierch (talk) 00:59, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chelsea Manning

Hi, Enayray. The image of Chelsea Manning isn't public domain. Even if the US Government used it, that doesn't make it PD. As it wasn't made directly as part of Manning's army employment, we must assume that the copyright belongs to her. The US Gov probably claim a fair use rationale on using/distributing the image, which often we can do (see WP:FUR), but as it's used to depict a person we can't use a non-free image as there's a free alternative available. I'm going to remove the image now (it's nominated for deletion at Commons, I suggest you get involved in the discussion); please don't add it back without first discussing here or on the article's talk page. matt (talk) 14:28, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Melissa Harris-Perry may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

{{Infobox person

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:03, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ramaa Mosley

I think there is too much there for a PROD to succeed - I could have deleted it tonight. My guess is that someone would be on my talk page within 24h. Any PROD can be disputed even after deletion, I would have had to restore it. Suggest it could be a candidate for WP:AfD to sort it out once and for all. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:43, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ronhjones (Talk), I think it should be deleted because all of the sources that are cited are for promotional use, rather than informational, and I've had to restore criticizing information because someone has tried to remove it. I don't believe it meets the Wikipedia page standards. Would you recommend and then see where it goes from there? Hugs, Enayray (talk) 22:49, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source

Always heard it more often call "late term" not later term. But I guess either would work. Late term gets a lot more google hits Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:35, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Doc James: Guttmacher Institute. It was in the 4th citation on the page itself. Also the 25th and 33rd citations. --Enayray (talk) 16:17, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure it is used just not as often as late term. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:36, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]