User talk:Kernel.package

Welcome

Hello, Kernel.package! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! Marcusmax(speak) 01:32, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Greetings from WikiProject Medicine!

Welcome to WikiProject Medicine!

I noticed you recently added yourself to our Participants' list, and I wanted to welcome you to our project. Our goal is to facilitate collaboration on medicine-related articles, and everyone is welcome to join (regardless of medical qualifications!). Here are some suggested activities:

Read our Manual of Style for medical articles and guide to Reliable medical sources

Join in editing our collaboration of the week (the current one is Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease)

Discuss with other members in the doctor's mess

Have a look at some related WikiProjects

Have a look at the collaboration dashboard

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page, or please feel free to ask for help, on talk page.

Again, welcome!

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 12:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{HelpMe}} Kernel.package (talk) 07:31, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What information is useful or interesting on this page? I know what I think but what answers the question from other WIkipedians?

Also, I submitted a change to an article about a common Linux tool. It was undone minutes later, then emailed the tool maintainer to ask them to help for a moment. ( I thought they would reply; didn't mean to intrude). They did not reply to me email but did respond by adding a section that clarified things. So, cool. I'm wondering what happened to the article history because I could not see where it reflects any of what I just wrote. Can somesome tell me?

I assume you are talking about this. You need a reliable source backing up your claim, or as you have seen, it will be reverted. As for emailing the tool owner, you are introducing a conflict of interest to the article, which is not advised. As for what is useful and interesting on this page - your talk page is mostly for discussion between contributors. — neuro^(talk) 10:40, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Wabigama

The article Wabigama has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable club with non-notable founders

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 17:17, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I mentioned in my question that deletion of the Wabigama article was not the reason for the question. The question asks why I wasn't able to find a reason the deletion template being added. However, I removed the deleteion template after findung information suitable for creationg stubs of the founders. When viewing the article about another club (whose name I do not recall), including of it as an article seemed to be based on the notariety of its founders. This is the reason the article in question was created.

Articles for deletion nomination of Wabigama

I have nominated Wabigama, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wabigama. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 16:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not feel that creating 3 articles (all unreferenced) and removing the PROD is sufficient.

You have not added any references to reliable sources, and cited these in the article.

You need to leave a message at the Article for Deletion discussion shown above explaining why the article meets Wikipedia's Notability Guidelines, and hence why it should not be deleted.

I strongly advise that you do leave a message here explaining why the article should not be deleted.

If you have any further questions, just contact me.

Incidently, I would suggest that you don't use the argument "I saw another article whose existence was based on the notability of its founders" without at least mentioning the other article - and in general, just because its been done in another article (for which I expect the founding members had established articles for themselves before the club article was created) does not mean it should be done for this article (see the essay "Other stuff exists").

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 16:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Deletion template states that the argument against deletion goes with the article that was nominated for deletion. Nevertheless, you seem to believe your rules are more important. I disagree. Sice you are coming back hgere to see my reply it isn't clear why you wrote "If you have any further questions, just contact me." This direction suggests that you want me to do something other than reply, here, but you've already written in your Talk page, that you want me to reply here. Your encouragement that I state a question iif I have one is, "Where is the definition you use for "noteworthy"? The Wikipedia article Notability_in_Wikipedia isn't complete, acording to the article. Since you seem to know what thearticle means, perhaps you can clarify it by adding the citations that the article page says are missing. Or perhaps you can simply state what it is you are really after. The article that inspired what I added is here: Farmington Country Club. The founders were leaders of government rather than science. Aside from this, and the age of the two clubs, I don't see a difference. The people from science who founded Wabigama are equally important, in medicine.

Use of another article is a logical process that recognizes a precedent. If the idea of following a precedent was not followed by contributors, Wikipedia would be the anarchist's dream that it once was. A precedent is also an example.

The existing entry is for the Farmington Country Club. To be frank, I don't think believe any country club is of enough interest to warrant entry into Wikipedia. However, I'm following a precedent. To me, people of science are as important as people whose existance gave rise to today's legal thinking and to social justice.

Since you are in a position of authority it would be nice to your actions exercised judiciously. This does imply objectivity so how you "feel" is not relevent, e.g. "...do not feel that creating 3 articles (all unreferenced) and removing the [PROD] ...". If this is a veilled reference to what you believe then perhaps you can provide the basis for the belief. I apprecaite examples. Since you are the recognized expert I don't believe there is someone better than you to provide an example of how you arrive at a conclusion; your reasoning. Executing a delete is easy; demonstrating what you believe meets established criteria in a way that allows me to actually improve, takes work.

Since you do seem hungry to delete I have no intention of getting in your way. If your intent is to add value to Wikipedia, perhaps yuo know of someone else with an interest in science or medicine, who may have time to contribute. In this case, that time could be used to take the stubs a I added, and to turn them into something tangible. The references are out here and my reason for including them in Wikipedia is to give credit to those whose work is noteworthy. What is "noteworthy" to me, given my science background, may not also be what you think is "noteworthy". If this is a reason to throw your weight around, go for it. I will hide asfrom the anarchy, as I did before because I haven't got the time for it.

Today I came for information from Wikipedia, nothing else. Your time would probably better spent by adding the citations to the page for Notability_in_Wikipedia. As long as this article remains less than a stellar example of what Wkikipedia claims to be, there is no solid ground for ascerting another article lacks credibility.

Kernel.package (talk) 19:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not looking to delete any articles. If you look at my history, you will see that several articles which were unsourced have been sourced by myself with reliable sources of information - even though I did not necessarily know a lot about the article in question.

I am not saying that the club is not notable - merely that I found no sources of reliable information to show that it is. What other articles about clubs have or do not have are not the issue - I am looking at this particular article, which from the guidelines which Wikipedia uses does not meet notability.

I have quickly logged onto wikipedia to check for a couple of messages I was waiting for, and am about to go offline - but I will (if necessary) give a fuller response to your full message (I'm not ignoring bits, I'm just short on time). Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 21:21, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I have time (and no family commitments!) to thoroughly read and respond to your message, I will no do so!

1. Firstly, I mentioned about contacting me if you have further questions out of politeness. As far as I am concerned, you leaving a response on this page is contacting me!
2. You were right to leave your reason for removing the PROD on the article's discussion page - I don't think that I said that this was incorrect - I merely added the article to the Articles for Deletion list as I do not feel that the club is notable, and that you had not addressed this. Nevertheless, you seem to believe your rules are more important. I disagree. - the guidelines that I followed are not my rules, they are the guidelines in use at Wikipedia
3. I never referred you to Notability_in_Wikipedia, my link went to the Guidelines in use in Wikipedia at Notability - more of which below.
4. Farmington Country Club: This article does not mention the founders - it mentions that Thomas Jefferson (3rd US President - definitely a notable person) designed the club house. the only notable members actually mentioned in the article are Edgar F. Shannon, Jr., who has an article with citations given - and the reason for his resignation from the club is also sourced; and Frank Hereford, again he has an article which is sourced, and the reason for his resignation his also sourced within the club's article.
5. I am not saying that political leaders and the like are more noteworthy than scientists. However, all articles have to show the notability of their subject, whether that is a political leader, a scientist, a club, a company, etc.
6. Use of another article is a logical process that recognizes a precedent - that can certainly be the case, but the new article must meet the criteria given for inclusion. Saying that because one article about a club exists means that any other club can have an article does not tie in with this.
7. I am not in a position of authority, any more than any editor on wikipedia (apart from administrators and the like) are. Executing a delete is easy; demonstrating what you believe meets established criteria in a way that allows me to actually improve, takes work. - If you read the notability guidelines I am linking to, that will show exactly what I would expect the article to have to show notability. I looked for evidence of notability (I know the club exists, there was sufficient evidence of that - it is the notability of the club which I do not think is demonstrated by any sources that I could find). I am giving you links to established criteria, which would enable you to improve the article - you may be able to find references that I cannot. This can include books and off-line sources that can be cited - not all sources have to be online to be accepted for wikipedia's purposes (it does not matter that I personally may not have access to these - they just need to be available for someone to access, for example in local libraries and the like) - for more information, see Wikipedia:Citing sources, Wikipedia:Verifiability (i.e. readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source) and Wikipedia:Reliable_sources.

As I mentioned above, I am not hungry to delete this article (or any other) - in fact, the three scientist founders that you created articles for (which are unsourced) are on my list of articles to look at to find sources for (if you look at my user page). However, for an article to be on wikipedia, it needs to meet the criteria given at Wikipedia:Notability - and in this case, specifically Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies). I looked for realiable citations, and could not find them (I didn't just nominate it for possible deletion on a whim, I looked for reliable citations first).

I would suggest that you place a message at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wabigama giving your reasons for the retention of the article. AfDs are not votes - they are discussions, and after about a week, an administrator will read through the discussion and look at the reasons given for and against deletion. However, if the main contributor does not give reasons why the article should be kept, that is one less voice in favour of keeping the article.

Finally, here are the criteria for notability of companies and organisations given at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), in summary:

An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. All content must be verifiable

1. 1. The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability.
  2. For non-commercial organisations, the main criteria for notability are:

Organizations are usually notable if they meet both of the following standards:

1. 1. The scope of their activities is national or international in scale.
  2. Information about the organization and its activities can be verified by third-party, independent, reliable sources. (In other words, they must satisfy the primary criterion for all organizations as described above.)

Again, I just want to emphasise that I did not refer you to Notability in Wikipedia, which is Wikipedia's encyclopedic entry about the subject, but to Wikipedia:Notability, which are the guidelines which are used to decide if a subject is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Please do not take this as a personal attack on you - To be honest, I would not have just spent the last 50 minutes typing this, with advise on what is necessary to prove notability, if I just wanted to attack you! I just feel that the article does not meet the criteria to be kept in Wikipedia. I may be wrong - in which case, there will be artguments in favour of keeping the article listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wabigama. If there are sufficient reasoned arguments in favour of keeping the article, I will withdraw the nomination as I have before - the whole purpose of the AfD is to discuss it, and no decision is made until the end of the process - and generally, if the person making the nomination withdraws that nomination, that shows that the arguments in favour of keeping the article have persuaded them, and generally the article will be kept!

May I just strongly advise you to leave a comment on the AfD page. As I said, I may be wrong in thinking that the Club is not notable enough for inclusion - but I have not very often found an article kept when the main contributor has neglected to give their reasons why the article should remain.

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 11:48, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John Crout article

I have tidied up the above article a little bit. I couldn't find any reference to Chester Carlson's book, or the obituary - but have inserted a reference to the only book by Chester Carlson that I could find - although I do not have access to this, so can't confirm that Crout is mentioned. The information mentioned about Crout in the Chester Carlson article does not give a citation about the mention of Crout, so I couldn't use that!

If you have information about the obituary (such as the newspaper it appeared in, the date, pages, etc) then this could be added to the article.

Incidently, looking at the book Copies in Seconds: How a Lone Inventor and an Unknown Company Created the Biggest Communication Breakthrough Since Gutenberg--Chester Carlson and the Birth of the Xerox Machine by David Owen doesn't list Crout in its index (you can see the index at the Amazon 'Search Inside' facility at Amazon's entry, so I was unable to cite that.

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 12:42, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Dragstedt article

I have quickly tidied it up, and removed the citation present - the article in question does not mention that Dragstedt discovered Histamine, and other references showed that he discovered the role of Histamine in Anaphylaxis. I have added a couple of references for the article. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 13:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is correct, Phantomsteve. The role of Histamine in Anaphylaxis (allergy/allergic reaction). Kernel.package (talk) 08:08, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lester Dragstedt article

Here is someone who is very notable - I'm surprised that there wasn't an article about him before you created it. I have expanded the article a bit, giving quite a few citations from very reliable sources (New York Times, Time Magazine (the one you had there, just tidied up), Chicago Tribune, etc).

I have also added information from the National Academy of Sciences' Biographical Memoir about him - there is a lot of information on there which can be used to expand the article further - we just have to be careful not to just copy it, the core information needs to be extracted and written in our own words!

I can't imagine that anyone would ever consider this for deletion, even though it is far from complete - there are too many citations from reliable sources, too much information about him... this is the kind of article which works as a basis for a fully-fledged article.

Thanks for creating this article - it is one about someone I hadn't heard of, but someone who is certainly notable, not just for the Siamese Twins seperation, but also for all the other research he did, and the techniques he developed. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 15:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of John Crout

The article John Crout has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Insufficient evidence of his notability. Being approached for support is not the same as actively supporting (and being instrumental in) the development of the xerographic process.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 22:23, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe the article should be deleted, then it probably should be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kernel.package (talk • contribs) 09:05, 15 September 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Hi Kernel.package. If you had looked at the article, you'll see that the PROD was removed as Crout could be notable. I have found 3 references, but if you could find more (probably offline) then that would be great. All the information on the article as it stands is all that I could find. In and of itself, it is enough to keep the article from being deleted, but not necessarily enough to keep it in Wikipedia indefinitely, it needs expanding. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 09:18, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Steve (I hope this reply is as you expect it to be formatted and located). I think I should withdraw from an further attempts to go either way. I am related to him and do not want any bias from me, to go with whatever is stated. I know what I know because I heard about it (and read about it) but the birth relationship should exclude me, I would think. As for expanding, the only other information that could be included would be classified if it exists. Battelle was integral in the Manhattan project and he served in WW1. His two sons are somewhat noteworthy; the eldest is alive and was a Director of the Bureau of Drugs. Aside from these things, there isn't likely to be anything else that can be written about him. Again, thanks for your time. Kernel.package (talk) 09:28, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Being related wouldn't actually stop you adding information, as long as it was written with a neutral point of view! As to his involvement with the Manhattan Project, I was under the impression that the vast majority of the papers etc have been declassified, as the Project ended more than 60 years ago! Anyway, if opportunity presents itself I will look for further information about him (but it's not a priority by a long way!). If you do have/find references about him in reliable sources and feel that you should not add it, just drop me a note on my talk page and I can add it. I have no particular desire to delete any articles - but if I feel they do not meet the criteria (and cannot find information myself), I will nominate them for deletion. Anyway, if you have any Wikipedia questions (not just about this article), feel free to contact me! -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 11:02, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An exciting opportunity to get involved!

As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest has already started, but a new round begins each month, and points are cumulative so you can easily catch up. Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. - Trevor MacInnis ^contribs 01:12, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion warning

Speedy deletion nomination of John Crout

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on John Crout requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, 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 article (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. The article at this moment does not establish a claim of notability. Who is he? Why is he important? Sephiroth storm (talk) 20:28, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably the notability issue was addressed by PhantomSteve's work. I have run into additional sources in recent months but not had opportunity to add to the source list he created. (For what this is worth). Kernel.package (talk) 16:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GovLoop

User:Fayenatic london and I have completed the articles for deletion listing of GovLoop which you started last month. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 21:24, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you! Kernel.package (talk) 23:11, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for attention - Christopher Busby

Hi. I noticed your interest in epidemiology and biostatistics. Perhaps you can help me with the above BLP. See [1]. Even referring this to another, more appropriate, editor would be greatly appreciated. Yakushima (talk) 14:25, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How can I help? I'm not sure if I'm responding to Christopher Busby or to Yakushima. I invite you to contact me via WP email if you are interested in a more timely response. Kernel.package (talk) 23:26, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for asking! Still a bit ignorant regarding WP acronyms it didn't occur to me this article was about a living person. Kernel.package (talk) 23:24, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Memorial service set for ex-Battelle executive.png

Thanks for uploading File:Memorial service set for ex-Battelle executive.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:05, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Appropriate licensing information is provided. Seems like the bot needs to be fixed. The uploaded image isn't a "pretty" picture -- so WP content isn't applicable. The image is a scan of copyrighted content with historical value and permission has been given toi use the scan for the purpose intended. Human, please view the image and associated information. Kernel.package (talk) 09:35, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kernel.package. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Orphaned non-free image File:Memorial service set for ex-Battelle executive.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Memorial service set for ex-Battelle executive.png. 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:49, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

The image isn't important other than the value it has in conferring the text. It's a scanned page from a newspaper article and the article was written long ago. Since I don't see where WP policy addresses this use of an image I obtained permission via email, from the Newspaper Editor to use the scanned article. How else might the information in that scan, be provided? (If the image is no longer in storage on WP, I can upload it again). Kernel.package (talk) 22:04, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The image was removed because it wasn't in any article. Which article was it in before?
- Also, you can contact the copyright holder and have them give permission for their image to be used on Wikipedia so it won't be deleted even if it's not used. If you want to do this I can find the relevant policy page. — Wolfgang42 (talk) 23:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - When I uploaded the image I explained what you're asking for. I don't know why it was ignored by Fastily. The newspaper editor gave me permission to post the image but it wasn't the "image" that's of value; the *text* is what's important. I uploaded it because the article about John_Crout required a verifiable citation. Kernel.package (talk) 02:47, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Medicine

Hi

I'm contacting you because, as a participant at Wikiproject Medicine, you may be interested in a new multinational non-profit organization we're forming at m:Wikimedia Medicine. Even if you don't want to be actively involved, any ideas you may have about our structure and aims would be very welcome on the project's talk page.

Our purpose is to help improve the range and quality of free online medical content, and we'll be working with like-minded organizations, such as the World Health Organization, professional and scholarly societies, medical schools, governments and NGOs - including Translators Without Borders.

Hope to see you there! --Anthonyhcole (talk) 08:23, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library now offering accounts from Cochrane Collaboration (sign up!)

The Wikipedia Library (talk | edit)

Get free access to research!

...Support Open Access...

The Wikipedia Library gets Wikipedia editors free access to reliable sources that are behind paywalls. Because you are signed on as a medical editor, I thought you'd want to know about our most recent donation from Cochrane Collaboration.

Cochrane Collaboration is an independent medical nonprofit organization that conducts systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials of health-care interventions, which it then publishes in the Cochrane Library.
Cochrane has generously agreed to give free, full-access accounts to 100 medical editors. Individual access would otherwise cost between $300 and $800 per account.
If you are still active as a medical editor, come and sign up :)

Cheers, Ocaasi^{t | c} 20:12, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Type certificate 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:

the US [[Federal Aviation Administration|FAA]] and the EU [[European Aviation Safety Agency|EASA]]). To meet those requirements the aircraft and each sub-assembly must also be approved. For

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Type certificate

Thanks for taking an interest in our article Type certificate. On 8 July 2013 you added some new material. On 29 July a comment was added to Talk:Type certificate saying The second sentence makes no sense - see the comment. I agree that the second sentence currently makes no sense. This is one of the sentences you added on 8 July. Please return to Type certificate and refine the new text you added. Many thanks. Dolphin (t) 05:58, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's been fixed. Kernel.package (talk) 16:07, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your free Cochrane account is on its way!

Please fill out this very short form to receive your free access to Cochrane Collaboration's library of medical reviews: Link to form.

If you have any questions, just ask me. Cheers, Ocaasi 13:20, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I didn't see your name in the list of email addresses submitted. If you still want an account, please use the form above. Cheers! Ocaasi^{t | c} 17:29, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 19:52, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi^{t | c} 14:46, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]