User talk:Kyle1278-2/2012 Archive

Orphaned non-free image File:Capital healthlogo002.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Capital healthlogo002.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. Skier Dude (talk) 20:42, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Algeria Canada Locator.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Algeria Canada Locator.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 19:56, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

FTSE Fledgling Index

In the article FTSE Fledgling Index, the section of Interlanguage links is zh:富時小型公司指數 .

But in the other article FTSE SmallCap Index, the section of Interlanguage links is :zh:富時小型公司指數.

The interlanguage link (zh:富時小型公司指數) is the same, but the contents of zh article is about "FTSE SmallCap Index", not "FTSE Fledgling Index". That's all of my edited summary.112.104.74.159 (talk) 06:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Indiana–Kentucky rivalry

Thank you for restoring the page. We have a rogue non-registered user who continues to move it to a different page. It's really annoying, and I appreciate your help.--YHoshua (talk) 04:33, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Winnipeg talk

Hey Kyle, I have not really looked over it in depth but it does need some work. A good starting place is to go back to what made it reach good article assessment.[1] We could look at having it reassessed again since it has not been done in over two years and someone who has some more time would be able to look at it more appropriately. I am just overbooked with University right now to really go through it. Krazytea(talk) 05:14, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

GAR

Edmonton, an article that your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article.— Precedingunsigned comment added by TBrandley (talk • contribs) 21:38, 18 November 2012 (UTC)