User talk:Fetler

February 2009

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at User talk:Fetler. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Pretzels^Talk! 22:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Pretzels

Pretzels, who are you referring to there? Lomcevak vandalised my talk page and was attempting to get an angry response from me, so I deleted it. Then he added another comment, which I deleted again. I will not have anyone doing that on my talk page to provoke me. If he wishes to apologise, then so be it. If not, then I will continue to delete his comments as I see fit. Fetler (talk) 22:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Info

To those who persist in vandalising my talk page - I will delete whatever you write. You will keep on adding your drivel, and I will keep on deleting it.

Fetler (talk) 13:21, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

WQA 20090228

This message is to inform you that a Wikiquette Alert has been initiated, naming you as an involved party. Please see the discussion at WP:WQA#User:Lomcevak, User:Fetler, and Natascha Engel for details, and to add your comments if desired. NOTE: You are not bound or required to participate in this discussion, however your input would be helpful to resolve any dispute that may have contributed to this alert being posted.

Some important things to remember during a Wikiquette discussion;

• A Wikiquette discussion is not an indictment, an insult, or a slight. Wikiquette discussions are an early step in dispute resolution, and involved users should bear that in mind during participation, so…
• Please remain civil. If you have a dissenting view, please present it calmly, and cite any references to talk page or article content with the applicable diffs.
• It is perfectly acceptable to disagree, as long as it is done agreeably.
• Please read the introduction at the top of the WQA page for additional information.

Edit Centric (talk) 17:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

And it has been responded to.

Lomcevak (talk) 13:45, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Redlinks

Hey Fetler, just a note to say I reverted your edit to Y'all Is Fantasy Island ‎per WP:REDDEAL - redlinks are cool when an article could be created in future. Thanks for your continued contributions! Pretzels^Talk! 16:16, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Edit Centric (ref.:WQA 20090228 ) 'retires' for a while (no voice)

Just FYI (in case you hadn't studied background) ...

Nothing is quite as simple as it seems, is it ? Least of all on Wiki ...

... 'n yes I know you're going to redact this 'drivel' too ...

Lomcevak (talk) 11:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

P.S. I'm now also aware of this previous 'contribution' from you to the Ellis discussion page:

• ==Love==

Lomcevak, are you in love with Natascha Engel, Sam Ellis and myself? You seem to devote an awful lot of your time rambling on about them and myself, and the death of New Mandelsonianithicanispianonian Labour of New Old Republicanmandelsonianblairismism or whatever you call it. Seriously, it's disturbing. Then again, I love watching it... it's like a highly comical nervous breakdown in slow motion. Where would we be without your rambles, rants, tirades and general buffoonery?

Fetler (talk) 16:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Now Postmodernism is a 'big word,' I know, but instead of ridiculing people who want to formulate and exchange ideas in language somewhat more expressive than New Labour verb free wordwooze ('Action - Modernization - Forward - Together'), why not try to engage in good faith. I may not agree will all Peter Oborne says, but here's a start to help you along ...

No, I don't love you, Levret, Ellis or Engel. You have come to be examples of a (political) way of being that I find 'empty' and that has resulted in much that is destructive in our society. That is my opinion, it belongs to me and that is my prerogative. You clearly have problems with my way of being. That is your prerogative.

However it is just as much my world as it is yours ...

Sorry we don't get along ...

Be well ...

Lomcevak (talk) 12:23, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sam Ellis (UK Youth Parliament)

A tag has been placed on Sam Ellis (UK Youth Parliament) 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 - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), 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. Nuttah (talk) 09:48, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Sam Ellis (UK Youth Parliament) for deletion

The article Sam Ellis (UK Youth Parliament) is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Ellis (UK Youth Parliament) 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 good 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. Tassedethe (talk) 21:46, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Mick Telfer for Chorley v Wimbledon 77.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Mick Telfer for Chorley v Wimbledon 77.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

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

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 14:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Chorley Victory Park Stand fire 1945.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Chorley Victory Park Stand fire 1945.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

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

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

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

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T/C) 19:19, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Pluto (newspaper) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pluto (newspaper) 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/Pluto (newspaper) 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. Peter James (talk) 20:00, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

yolo swag

File:Barrier.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Barrier.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:28, 16 November 2014 (UTC)