User talk:Gungadin/Archive10

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Gungadin. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Patrick Trueman‎

Thank you i am to please. --Imed Ned (talk) 17:27, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

That doesn't make sense.Gung adin 17:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

(Hi Gungadin, don't think we've spoken since I came back!) I've reported this vandal :) -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:35, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

No sorry, I had meant to say it's great to have you back, I thought for a while that you may have left for good :) That Trueman guy never seems to give up. I think he was the one that the The Sun said killed Dot.Gung adin 18:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Pauline Fowler

Has the article been featured on the main page yet? Is it due to anytime soon? -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:57, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

No, at least I dont think, but im not on here every day. But im sure AP would have mentioned if it was. I have no idea how long til it gets on the front page. I think I once came upon a list of upcoming ones, they seem to plan it way in advance, so it might be on that.Gung adin 21:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

It looks like you have to nominate it. I think we should nominate it for 11 March - Pauline's birthday. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, 19 February. I'm gonna do it now. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests#February 19. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Cool, I thought they were just selected at random, didnt know you had to nominate it. Though apparently it's a bit of a nightmare when they go on the front page, they get continuously vandalised, or butchered, but that can happen anyway I suppose. Gung adin 21:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Pauline's been removed, there can only be five on there at any one time apparently.Gung adin 21:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

That's a bit daft! But I'm glad we're finally thinking about this. I wanted someone who knew about it to nominate it straight away, hence why I asked what happens next straight after the article was promoted. I never look at the main page so I'd never know if it was added there (if it was random). ^anemone│_projectors 21:27, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Tut! someone's pinched our date with Battle of the Gebora !!! Gung adin 23:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

That's not fair, we were there first!!!!! ^anemone│_projectors 00:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

11 March then? -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 00:11, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure, whenever you like. We'll all have to keep an eye on it and pounce before someone else adds another article to the list.Gung adin 00:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

I'd forgotten what it's like! :/ I'll ~~throw you to the lions~~ nominate you soon! You'd make a really good admin, IMO. -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 00:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't give up, you can always amend your answers. Sometimes it's difficult to say exactly what you mean when you're put on the spot. BTW i'd be a terrible admin. I would hate blocking people, i'm indecisive, If I need to know anything about what to do on wiki I ask you and AP (9 times out of 10), basically, i'd be a shit admin. And, i'd never tolerate the abuse of an RFA. Anyone would think that you weren't actually trying to help the project here. Oh well, Don't let it get to u :) Gung adin 01:13, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not going to, most of the oppose comments are constructive and they're nice about it, but I swear some people like opposing for no reason. I'm not answering any more of the optional questions on there, as my answers seem to be the main reasons people are opposing - so I just won't give any more answers seeing as they're optional. AP hasn't supported/opposed yet - maybe he's just keeping out of it because he doesn't want to do either... -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the user with question 8 is trying to throw you a life line, he's said as much in his oppose vote below, and the question seems reasonable enough. He just wants you to give a really good answer and cover everything that he feels you missed out, he might change his vote on that basis, and others could follow too. So just take your time with it and think about it, and of course you don't have to answer. But question 9 is definitely not something you should answer. He's seems like he's just baiting. He was the one that made the essay Wikipedia:Cruft portal that he's asking you about, and the EE portal is listed there as cruft. It's up for deletion anyway.Gung adin 17:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Image

Instead of removing rfu tag you should've contested it by adding {{subst:di-replaceable fair use disputed|Your reason why a free replacement can not be found or created}} tag. Thank you--NAHID 20:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

You are mistaken here. I did not tag without checking the image (where it's being used). Aside Maria Sutherland, the image was also being used in Samia Smith (your removal of image) and there was no section in that article that illustrates the value of image. Non free image should not be used in biographical (Biography of living person) article unless there is certain section that describes about that image.In the mean time, I'd say you shouldn't remove the tag. The license page clearly specified Please do not remove the tag. Instead, you should add dispute tag to contest it.--NAHID 20:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, then you should have removed the image from the actor's page in the first place, and then you wouldn't have needed to tag the image at all. Just like I did. Your tag was not necessary, so I removed it.Gung adin 23:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Dot Cotton Link Doesn't Even Exist

I've never asked anyone to remove something. The link you have provided does not mention Dot Cotton being a gay icon, because she has had a luckless life. Word it differently, sort of makes it sound like Homosexuals have luckless lives to. There must be a link out there though, that will support this claim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raintheone (talk • contribs) 21:24, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

It does say that, that piece of information has been there for well over a year, and has been verified by other people on the project long before you came along. It's the jounalist's view on what makes a gay icon, not mine. The link went dead on the free site, ive provided the same page, but it's now a pay per view site, so you dont get the full article. Regardless, you shouldnt just remove references when they go dead. It happens all the time, but it doesnt mean the information is no longer usable. This is why we have access dates listed in references. Here's what to do when links go dead Wikipedia:Citing sources#What to do when a reference link "goes dead" Gung adin 21:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Still doesn't mention Dot does it. Realiable links are often better, but if it's been varified then obviously they didn't look at it. Sorry to be picky, one persons view isn't fact though is it. He is just filling text space for a article. Bound to question aren't you when you see something like that. Raintheone (talk) 21:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but you're wrong. It does mention Dot Cotton, Tiffany Mitchell too, and various other soap characters. How can you even comment when you haven't fully read the article? Of course one person's opinion isnt fact, and that's why the article Dot Cotton says she has been "labelled" as a gay icon. That she's been labelled as a gay icon is factual, because she has, in the article that's been referenced. Every single word in a newspaper article is about filling text space, so what's you point? This article happens to be solely about pink pin-ups and gay icons, so oddly enough, the journalist is filling text space with supposed gay icons, including Dot.Gung adin 22:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Would you do the same for Tiffany Mitchell article then, and state she is too. Would be a great help would that. :) Raintheone (talk) 22:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I never would have considered Tiffany a gay icon! How bizarre! ^anemone│_projectors 22:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Well if I did, it would be perfectly acceptable to do so, because i'm not giving my opinion, i'm giving the opinion of a journalist. Dot clearly isnt your gay icon Raintheone, and I do sympathise as this is obviously an important issue for you, but maybe you should be taking this up with the Evening Standard instead? Perhaps you could start a petition to have Dot denounced as a gay icon or something? Would be a great help would that :) Gung adin 22:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Well if this site says it she must be. It is our duty to inform the fans of EE isn't it. I have nothing wrong with Dot being a Icon, just the reason isn't good. I've actually liked talking to you, you have good banter! Shall we do some editing Raintheone (talk) 22:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

If Dot wasn't a gay icon, there wouldn't be a gay nightclub named after her. ^anemone│_projectors 00:22, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not disputing that though, I'm saying we need to word if differently. Maybe 'Gay poeple have sympathised with her tragic and unlucky events of her life leading her to become a gay icon. It just sounds like gay people like her because she has had a hard life like gay people. Thankyou you two for talking this over with me, I know i'm a pain. Raintheone (talk) 01:25, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

That would be original research, though. We can't prove that gay people sympathise with her, because (as you mentioned above) the article is just the opinion of one journalist. He specifically talks about her "hard-luck life" in the article, so that's all we can say from that reference. If we change it to what you said then we would be editorialising, unless you can find another source that is.Gung adin 19:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Stacey Branning condensing

Woop! Go us! It's really condensed now and looks good! -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, we did well today didn't we, we're master condensers :) gotta watch out for Stacey's biggest fan though. He/she pops on every day and likes to add POV like how hard done by Stacey is, and how she has a heart of gold and is desperately reaching out for love. I think he/she must read Mills & Boon novels. Gung adin 17:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I will keep an eye out! I'm working on an OOU section for Mo Harris now (here). -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:18, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sheree Murphy eme.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sheree Murphy eme.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Sharon&Grant kiss.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sharon&Grant kiss.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:19, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Steveiyiui.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Steveiyiui.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Joan Hooley

There is a Joan Hooley whose birth was registered in the Oct-Nov-Dec quarter of 1936. Her mother's maiden name was Kilshaw. District: Machnester S., Volume: 8d, Page 184. ^anemone│_projectors 11:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, so what do you think I should do? seems that that BFI website are going on the same info you found (they mention districts etc), but I guess it might not be the same woman. Cant understand why the newspaper article would say she was born in Jamaica if she wasnt.Gung adin 19:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

It might not be the same woman, though it seems unlikely as it's not exactly a common name, and it's the same year and quarter. Not really sure what you should do to be honest. ^anemone│_projectors 21:33, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Matthew Robinson

Exactly how many characters did he axe!? It seems like loads! The ones I know are Dr. Legg, Sanjay and Gita (and therefore Arjun and Sharmilla) and Annie. Apparently he axed about 20! :O Who were they? And who did he introduce? -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 11:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

He did axe loads, it's always reported that he axed 26/28 (apparently the most ever across all soaps), but some of them left by their own choice, and others like Dr Legg hadnt been on-screen for ages anyway.

Axed: George Palmer, Ruth Fowler, Bruno and Luisa di Marco, the Kapoors, Michael and Susan Rose, Chris Clark, Dr Legg, Polly Becker, Lenny Wallace, Huw Edwards, Tony Hills, Simon Raymond, Louise Raymond, Lilly Mattock, Josie McFarlane, Connor Flaherty, Mary Flaherty, Sam Mitchell. He also made the decision to kill Cindy Beale off-screen after she refused to return (which pissed Michelle Collins off), and he and Mal Young were responsible for killing Tiffany Mitchell against Martine McCutcheon's wishes (she was leaving, but didnt want Tiff to die).

Left of their own accord: Grant Mitchell, Annie Palmer, Sarah Hills, Tiffany Mitchell, Bianca Butcher, Alex Healy, Fred Fonseca, Matthew Rose

Introduced: Jamie Mitchell, Lisa Fowler, Billy Mitchell, Mel Healy, Steve Owen, Jackie Owen, Josie and Kim McFarlane, Dan Sullivan, Nina Harris, Fred Fonseca, Liily Mattock, Troy Harvey (short-term)

Reintroduced: Natalie Evans (Fultime), Janine Butcer (fulltime), Kathy Mitchell (short-term), Carol Jackson (short-term), Jim Branning (fulltime), Michael Rose (ST recurring), Andrea Price(recurring), Sam Mitchell (fulltime)

It was all because Corrie was consistently beating EE in the ratings for the first time in ages. Corrie got a new producer called Brian Parks, who went on a similar axing spree, and he brought in loads of viewers with sensationalist storylines like making Hayley a transsexual, the Battersbys, and sending Dierdre to prison etc. I'm so sad for knowing all this useless EE trivia :) Gung adin 18:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

You sure are, but that's why we need you! ^anemone│_projectors 23:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

How rude!! you weren't supposed to agree ;) Gung adin 23:23, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Jeez! He axed loads! I did notice when I first created the list of past characters that the "Left in 1998" section was huge... -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 23:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Man, I thought Brian "The Axeman" Park was bloody brutal (The Guy who shook up Corrie in '97 and Blew up The Harts in FA in '99) But Robinson was an effing butcher. I did notice in '98 EE went off the boil but recovered near the end of that year. Conquistador2k6 00:34 21 February 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 00:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

With a few exceptions (like Louise, Sanjay, Lilly), I agree with most of his axings. There was pretty naff characters around at that time, like Susan Rose. It was a crime to kill Cindy and Tiff off tho!! He did introduce some good characters and storylines, like Steve and Mel and the whole Saskia murder stuff and Bianca's affair. How could I forget, he brought back Sam Mitchell too, but then axed her a few months later. not surprising since Danniella Westbrook looked like a coked-up corpse in 1999. Matthew Robinson's successor John Yorke axed a fair few too.Gung adin 01:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Daniella Westbrook

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edit(s) to Daniella Westbrook, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. Rsazevedo ^msg 14:00, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nat andB.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nat andB.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:09, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Jerry Morton.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Jerry Morton.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll let it go for two weeks, but I did a fairly good search for references to Jerry Morton and found almost none. You can see that every time it gets "recreated", the result falls far short of an acceptable article. Happy editing! =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 21:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Dr Grahame Stone.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dr Grahame Stone.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it may be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 13:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Dina Carroll Album.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dina Carroll Album.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it may be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sean Slater EE.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Sean Slater EE.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 01:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Ignore the above, tagged by mistake and now removed. Polly (Parrot) 01:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Jan Graveson.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Jan Graveson.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. - AWeenieMan (talk) 23:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

"Mousy"Micallef on Matthew Marsdens page.

Here is a reference for the name of Matthew Marsdens wife.I have no idea how to add it. "Mousy" is someone being unkind about her. http://www.fandango.com/rambo_110976/moviephotosevents?ImageId=223060

"Mousy"Micallef on Matthew Marsdens page.

Here is a reference for the name of Matthew Marsdens wife.I have no idea how to add it. "Mousy" is someone being unkind about her. www.fandango.com/rambo_110976/moviephotosevents?ImageId=223060 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.17.12.204 (talk) 01:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for showing me, i'll add it now. Gung adin 01:40, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable IMAGES

BLAH, WHINGE, SPAM... (a summarised version) One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 14:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

You are

absolutely brilliant, do you know that? But you watch far too much Family Guy. ^anemone│_projectors 17:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

lol, thanks, what do you mean about Family Guy though? Gung adin 17:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Ha Ha, at this Gung adin 17:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

That is so fucking funny. What I mean is this and this. ^anemone│_projectors 18:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

:) Family Guy does rock, especially Stewie, but Jem was way before that, in the 80s. The theme tune was fab [1] Gung adin 00:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I know, I loved Jem! But Adam West uses that same line in one episode ;) ^anemone│_projectors 00:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh I see, I love how they make random tv references in that show :) Gung adin 01:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nina Brown EE.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nina Brown EE.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Family life sandy.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Family life sandy.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nicola stapleton badgirls .jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nicola stapleton badgirls .jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:MGAYLE00.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:MGAYLE00.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:37, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mart0098898.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Mart0098898.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:20, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Martine M888.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Martine M888.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Mel....jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Mel....jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Paul Burrell celeb.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Paul Burrell celeb.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Doc^g 19:25, 8 March 2008 (UTC)