User talk:JohnRussell/Archive 1

Image copyright problem with Image:Devo_20-big.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Devo_20-big.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags.

Please do not recreate already deleted material

I am not sure if but the Spinnwebe was already voted for deletion with the decision to delete (Spinnwebe AFD).--Jersey Devil 06:31, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SpinnWebe has been nominated for AFD again

As a heads-up, SpinnWebe has been nominated for AFD a second time at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SpinnWebe. I strongly encourage you to participate in the discussion. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal

I have deleted Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal. Whether an article on this topic should exist in Wikipedia has already been discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal less than a month ago, and the result was that it should not. - Liberatore(T) 17:33, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tampa Bay and Beyond

Tampa Bay and Beyond has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt this website might not be notable enough for an article. Please review WP:WEB for the relevant guidelines. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the prod notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. NickelShoe 23:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Xmassuf banner.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Xmassuf banner.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

1987

Mate, it really would be helpful if you didn't revert me a few minutes after I've listed the article as a Featured Article Candidate. We're supposed to have stability! The authoratative source is the KLF Discography, which doesn't include BPMs in the track names and imho it's a trainspotter level of detail. Never mind, we'll leave them for now and I'll add a footnote. --kingboyk 19:02, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you've probably seen it got promoted :) Sorry for snapping, panic over! --kingboyk 20:20, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enlightenment?

I noticed that you've added "connected writings on enlightenment" to the Huahujing article again. I'm afraid I don't understand what this phrase means. Is it a quote? Thanks. Keahapana 20:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Red labor

Hi there. I deleted an article you created, Red labor, as failing our criteria for speedy deletion, specifically A7 as lack of notability and G11 as promotional for a small group. Please do not recreate the article, but continue to edit! Teke^(talk) 03:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Red labor

Hello JohnRussell,

I apologize for not responding to your message on the article Red labor. I have only been online here a few minutes once every few days for the past couple months, and I did miss your message. This is a communication failure on my part and my apologies once again.

As far as the article goes, I will not participate in the deletion review as the closing admin. I should not have used "blatant advertising" as my summary, instead I should have used promotional. The article as is simple said that:

Red Labor is an artist group run by Josh Bertrand and Dave Rau that was founded in Tampa, FL. They primarily do website and screen printed designs and work in a faux worn look.

References

Analogue Part of Cameron Moll's That Wicked Worn Look; tips about starting your next analogue design.
iStockphoto.com : Articles - Red Labor Presents: Faux Real
iStockphoto.com : Articles - Know Your Type: Starting points for typographic inspiration;
Web Standards Awards :: Archive :: Red Labor
29th Annual Juried USF Student Art Exhibition Design by Red Labor
28th Annual Juried USF Student Art Exhibition Design by Red Labor
Artist Profile at Tampa Bay and Beyond

External links

Official Site
Iron-On Resistance: Lovely independent art products

There is no notability asserted here, in my opinion, to merit an article. If you would like to recreate the article, by all means do with expansion. As is, the article offers links and references but there is not expansion beyond the definition, and it's hard to search for "Red labor" on the internet. I apologize for the inconvenience, and if the DRV fails by all means make the article again but assert notability. Happy editing to you! Teke^(talk) 07:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clayton Counts / The Beachles

Hi, John. I see that you were a contributor to the Beachles article. Well, it looks like a couple of people are now proposing the deletion of the article I wrote for Clayton Counts. It's currently in debate, and I was wondering if you wouldn't mind casting a vote to keep the article around? Their main concern seems to be that Counts isn't notable, although he clearly meets the Wikipedia eligibility requirements for notability as established in WP:MUSIC. I have provided several more links and references, also. Here's the link to the debate.[1] TrevorPearce 14:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for chiming in over there. The consensus was to keep the article. Sorry to bug you with this, but I have just re-added "Sgt. Petsound's" to the list of notable bootlegs on the mash-up page. This will most probably result in somebody de-listing it, but I have provided reasons for its inclusion on the mash-up talk page. (More than a couple of the bootlegs listed there fail WP:MUSIC for notability, while Counts' does not.) If you wouldn't mind seconding the motion, it may help to keep things NPOV. Thanks for all the trouble. TrevorPearce 16:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great... thanks a lot. If you feel like leaving a comment under mine on the talk page, that would probably be enough to discourage some contributors from removing it. I hate to police them, but the article is really very biased in places. TrevorPearce 16:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:The JAMS- 1987-side1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:The JAMS- 1987-side1.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:The JAMS- 1987-side2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:The JAMS- 1987-side2.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 07:08, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:AKR028.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:AKR028.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 06:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Xmassuf_banner.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Xmassuf_banner.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 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. Rette tast 15:18, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:1373893586 l.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:1373893586 l.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) 19:09, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clayton Counts (again)

Hey John. Well, this time there is an edit war ongoing because of Clayton's recent death notice. Since it is was an announcement made on his official website, it deserves to be included in his article, whether he's really dead or not. Others are removing the section and reverting to prior versions that make no mention of the claim, because they believe that it is a hoax. Right now, no one seems to know for sure whether he's faking it, but even if it is a hoax I think it should be mentioned. If you could help me to watch the page, or suggest how I might put an end to the edits, it would be appreciated.TrevorPearce (talk) 15:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Devo 20-big.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Devo 20-big.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) 21:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Dustin and the Furniture

A tag has been placed on Dustin and the Furniture requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 15:26, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Map Records discography

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Oh! Map Records discography, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 15:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect of Oh map

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Oh map, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Oh map is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Oh map, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 15:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Librarian staff suggestions 07.jpg

The policy page you quoted at me (the criteria for speedy deletion) says it all- material that cannot be used for commercial purposes is not acceptable for Wikipedia, as we aim to have our content free for others to use as well as free to use here. I don't quite see this issue- do you not understand the policy you quoted, or do you not agree with it? J Milburn (talk) 16:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Novelist.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Novelist.gif. 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. J Milburn (talk) 16:56, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reader's advisory

Is not a featured article, so can't be reviewed at WP:FAR; perhaps you were looking for peer review? Also, templates go on the article talk page, not on the article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source for Image:At the Library.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:At the Library.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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 files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:06, 16 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 20:06, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Indirect readers advisory.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Indirect readers advisory.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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 files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 20:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:At the Library.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:At the Library.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

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), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:At the Library.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Sdrtirs (talk) 23:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]