User talk:H14

Vandalism Query

Hi there. I'm afraid that I don't recall ever accusing you of vandalism or reverting your edits, unless you were not logged in to the account name 'Hzoons' at the time of your edit. If you still believe I incorrectly accused you of something, please reply back on my talk page with the specifics and I will review the situation. Tomayres (talk) 17:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes I just took a look and this seems to be the case. The user in question has since been blocked. No worries :) Tomayres (talk) 18:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stateless

Hi Hans,

assessing is an inexact science. i've assessed a lot of articles and I can normally quickly identify where the choice is to be made i.e. stub/start, start/C, C/B. it is then normally a bit of a challenge as the article can normally be argued to fit in either grade Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment#Grades. This article is easily Start/C, it has a picture and reliable sources and some sections. It has about 500 words readable prose. I would say this is quite short for a band that has been going for 6 years and has two albums. My main tip would be to simply add content e.g. how did they form? what has been the critical reception? etc etc Tom B (talk) 17:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TUSC token be0676feb4d6bc35c8be9dcb8785abff

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Hello, I'm The Best Awful. My work on The Veils page was just aimed to give this band a sort of biography & discography as objective as possible, nothing else. Someone put on my user page some injuries, obiouvsly when was unlogged. Hope you weren't. Anyway I am pretty disappointed, I hope that someone else will do a good job on The Veils page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Best Awful (talk • contribs) 14:21, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Best Awful, again. When I say injuries I mean that someone wrote on my user page words like stupid and vagina, both refered to me but I don't know for which reason. I guess I know who wrote it but it doesn't really matter. About the warning messages I know they are automatically generated. The file I wrote on The Veils page was a work brought together from different sources around the web, and most part from previous versions of The Veils page of Wikipedia. The fact is that the things are confused about their history, it is not that easy like the other users who edit the page think and write. I tried to reconstruct The Veils history and I think my version was pretty close to the truth, and only The Veils singer Finn Andrews can actually tell the real time-line, so we probably never have it for public knowledge. I said things as objective as I could but there where no actual sources to cite. It's right to have rules on Wikipedia but they don't automatically lead to objectivity. I mean I read a lot of wrong informations here (I read mostly about music bands) that have sources, because the web is full of crap, they are wrong but they stay, so... About the images I have seen on The Smashing Pumpkins page that there are promotional shots of the band, which way those images were copyrighted? And on the current The Veils page, on the intro, we find two opinions of reviewers (Drowned in Sound and LA Times) that are pretty useless on an encyclopedic page, they are not objective statements. Finally, I removed all my contributions, like the links to CD covers which were scans of my personal collection, and tried to leave The Veils section as it was before my editing. And it was pretty poor. Except for the main page, where I wrote a little provocation that I was sure someone would have soon removed. The users who usually edit The Veils now can make their work, I hope they will give good contributions because The Veils have no bio or discography even on their official website. Sorry for my terrible english, as someone said, I hope you understanded.

Orphaned non-free image File:Tsu i aint losing any sleep single.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tsu i aint losing any sleep single.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:22, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Tsu borders single.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Tsu borders single.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possible removal of AWB access due to inactivity

Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]