Hello Norum, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
You have uploaded a number of images claiming they are licenced as "any use". Can you justify this claim? At least can you tell us the copyright holder and source so we can check? The image will be deleted if you can't justify the claims you have made Zeimusu | Talk page13:33, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The other pictures are to be found on many other sites.
Your recent contribution(s) to the Wikipedia article Jan Borysewicz are very much appreciated. However, you did not provide references or sources for your information. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Wikipedia by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. If sources are left unreferenced, it may count as original research, which is not allowed. Can you provide in the article specific references to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content in the article? You can use a citation method listed at How to cite sources. Thanks! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul PiotrusTalk13:20, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The IMDB is an idiot website and isn't considered a reliable source for anything. It's a second,third,fourth-hand source. See this - a first hand source - It explains where the "1954" legend came from - http://www.kryptonsite.com/johnschneider.htm
"John Schneider was born in 1954 in Snailville, Georgia. Or so the legend goes, when John auditioned for the role of "Bo Duke" on the popular TV series The Dukes of Hazzard. The producers were looking for a 24-year-old from the South. At the time, John (born in 1960) was only 18 years old and hailed from Mt. Kisco, New York. John's ruse worked, however; and he got the role of the blond Duke cousin, a role that made him famous." Vulturell06:40, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I have read it and yeah, you are right. I won't change back to 1954 again.
Could you please add a source for your recent addition? The sources we have state that it was not the spy, but the breaking of Soviet radio cyphers that gave Piłsudski the necessary knowledge.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul PiotrusTalk11:03, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
I was watching a polish program in Canada a few months back and they had the whole segment concentrating on the Polish-Bolshevik war.[reply]
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. I've noticed you've uploaded some images tagged with {{web-screenshot}}. This tag is not meant to be used for images that came from Web pages; it's meant to be used for images of Web pages (such as Image:Google screenshot.png, for example). I've retagged the images below as having no license information. Please make sure that Wikipedia has permission to use these images. Then edit the image description pages to include information about the licenses these images are under. You may find an appropriate tag at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags or Wikipedia:Template messages, or if none of these fit you may write a description of the license yourself. You may want to refer to the image use policy. If the use of this image on Wikipedia is a copyright violation, please follow the steps at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion to nominate this image to be deleted. If you have any questions, please feel free to post a message on my talk page. —Bkell18:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about? This has been already settled. WEhere did you take the whole web-screenshot idea from? Read carefully before you post some ridiculous statements. This picture is copyrighted by the owner of the official website www.lady-pank.pl.com.
If you have any question, contact them. This has been already settled.
Yes, you have established the source of the image. You have also established that they hold the copyright. Now you need to make a justification for why Wikipedia can use this copyrighted image.
The copyright holder is the only one who can legally reproduce this image. So we must either have permission from the copyright holder to use the image, or we must provide a rationale that explains why the four conditions for fair use are met. Otherwise we risk violating United States copyright laws.
Currently the only thing the image description page gives is a source. It must also include a justification for the legality of using this image on Wikipedia. It falls upon you, the uploader of this image, to provide this justification. If I can help at all, please leave a message on my talk page, but please approach this with reason and without personal attacks. —Bkell04:35, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize if it sounded like an attack, it wasn't my intention to sound like that. Thing is, I did not place the image under the "web-screenshot" group.
Thanks for uploading Image:1000003429.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Sherool(talk)00:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me, but the information is right there on the picture itself. This is from www.searchextreme.com and it is for public use.
I was already checked with the sitr fell free to contact them again.
Plus its status was okay for over a month and now suddenly it's wrong?
Thanks for uploading Image:Veronica-braizl (2).jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Durin15:19, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Veronica-brazil-hot (2).jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Durin15:19, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please do NOT remove "no source" tags (as you did here)from images until a source is provided. Removing these tags without providing a source is considered vandalism. Thank you.
An image that you uploaded, Image:Ali Agca.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.
An image that you uploaded, Image:Thimphu1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.
Thanks for uploading Image:MPerepeczko.JPG. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. GraemeL(talk)17:23, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:MMFN Cherie stills 299.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. GraemeL(talk)17:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:EvaAngelina.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. GraemeL(talk)17:26, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Image copyright problem with Image:Europe040727 1024.jpg
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images 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. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. --GraemeL(talk)17:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you have problems with me uploading "copyrighted stuff", why don't you check with the websites I provided you with as the source.
Why don't you simply delete it, see if I care.
Feel free to do it.
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. -- Carnildo01:54, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The opening sentence describes the location (in the northwestern part) of the voivodship within the historic and geographic region of Silesia; the aforementioned region happens to be in Poland. "Northwest" describes Dolny Śląsk Voivodship in Silesia, not within Poland as a whole. If you'd like I can add a clarifier to Poland. Olessi12:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to help out. By the way, if you want to add a comment to someone's talk page, the quickest way is to click on the small "+" tab next to the "edit this page" tab. Crypticfirefly08:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Kruszwica, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.gminy.cps.pl/kruszwica/2e.htm. As a copyright violation, Kruszwica appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Kruszwica has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Kruszwica. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Kruszwica, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia.
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images 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. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Stan20:07, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the message a little more closely - we need you to put a license on it too, like GFDL or CC. The boilerplate message isn't always the greatest fit to any particular image, but we have many thousands of images any one of which is potentially a serious legal problem for Wikipedia, and we have uploads of hundreds more untagged images each day, so we have to streamline the process as much as possible (or disable uploads altogether, which some have suggested). Anyway, if you were to preemptively fix up all your images, that would really be a big help. Stan20:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Deltabeignet deleted him first (for "non-notable person") and since you immediately recreated the exact same text, I deleted it because it was "recreation of deleted material." It's actually not clear from reading the article as it why Ondrus is important, so I'll try to help you with formatting. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:45, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I had to remove that "talent analysis" because unless you can find quotes or other sources for that opinion, it doesn't belong in Wikipedia. If you disagree, just put it back and we can work on rewording it. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images 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. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Shyam(T/C)13:59, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for trying to tag it. Still it is untagged. It seems to be copyrihted image. Please contact copyright owner to get copyright information. Thanks, Shyam(T/C)01:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kudos for writing the Steve Stavro article. I was shocked about a month ago to find out that there was no article on him, but i didn't know much about him other than that he used to be the Leafs owner. Croat CanuckGo Leafs Go18:06, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Kudowa_-_emblem.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thanks for uploading Image:197390990kpPsRO_ph.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
I have made many of the redirects from Grandmasters names to the TO article, in order to "catch" different spellings and start a "network" that connects other mentions in articles about battles, treaties etc. That Norum wants to replace them with proper articles is good, that he simply deleted the redirects first is not (blanking). Also, I suggest to remove the numbering and use the most simple name, eg. Konrad Zöllner von Rotenstein instead of Konrad III Zöllner von Rotenstein.--Matthead21:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that you experimented several times until you found a working tag. You don't need to "save page" each try, just use "show preview" and then store once at the end. This keeps the edit history compact, and applies to other articles, too. Thanks in advance. --Matthead08:03, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Heinrich Reus von Plauen.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Hello Norum! Good work on creating articles for the Grand Masters of the Teutonic Order. Here are some tips that you might want to keep in mind when creating content. Individual years shouldn't be wikilinked (ie 1525, not 1525). Years should only be linked if a specific date is mentioned (ie January 11525, not January1525). Ordinal suffixes should not be used (January 1, not January 1st). Also, places of birth and death should not be mentioned in parentheses at the beginning of articles. Instead, those places should be mentioned later in the article. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) has more information if you are interested. Happy editing! Olessi20:11, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I note your comment and will happily leave you in peace to build the articles up. Sorry to be too quick on the draw, but have encountered so many total idiots in the last few days that my patience has worn unusually thin. Best, Staffelde01:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That absoluteastronomy link you found is actually a wikimirror of an older version of our own Battle of the Ice article: I recognized it immediately since I had added the information (subsequently removed). Unless someone finds a reliable source indicating Malberg was actually there, it should be removed in a few days, IMO. To avoid finding wikimirrors while using google, I use the meta:Mirror filter for firefox. Thanks for checking for me. Olessi15:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
i noticed you've accused me of vandalism at deaths in 2006. in fact, i was merely following the policy whereby for the english wikipedia we require an english language source as otherwise anyone could link anything and we'd be none the wiser. please consider adding an appropriate source to the article and checking your facts before you call vandalism next time W guice23:00, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
i didn't, i first tagged it with a 'citation needed', which i see you also removed. if people are listed on the page unsourced (read also: where the only source is non-english), they tend to get removed until someone can provide a source. W guice23:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
hello again, it's no problem really, i looked at it again and i should really apologise also for being too hasty in taking it off without explaining properly. so... sorry about that. take it eazy W guice20:20, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with the way both articles stand now. They should reflect the players' dual citizenship, and as such both players belong in both the Swedish and Canadian ice hockey players categories. BoojiBoy15:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Cherie 170x200 RLD fix2.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
Hey. Wow. Someone else added something to McGowan's War. I've been meaning to for a while now as I was the one that created the stub, and it's a critical element in early BC history that needs to be in Wiki, partly because it's going to be ref'd in about another 20 articles concerning the period; same as the Fraser Canyon War which as you can see from the redlink I've been too lazy/busy to write the stub for....Anyway, like your stuff although I should advise you of a caveat on all Digital Collections pages, as they're often either one-sided or poorly researched, and there's no feedback to feed them corrections if they blow it. The whole story of McGowan's War is best told in the book of the same name by Donald J. Hauka, which sets the stage, as well as tells the story of the Canyon War, and also manages to show us that McGowan wasn't the bogeyman other BC histories have made him into (e.g. the Akrigg's BC Chronicle which vilifies him without vilifying his enemies equally). Anyway, just a heads-up; I'm trying to find a public-domain image of Yale or one of the drawings of Hill's Bar (there were no photogs in Yale in the fall of '58) and I'll also try and draw up a map of the British military manoeuvres accompanying it, showing also the mobilized US Border Commission troops in Whatcom County...Read Hauka's book; it's very readable and an eye-opener...17:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Wow, it took me 10 years to reply to this comment.....to be honest, i haven't heard of McGowan's War at that point. I just happened to be reading a western that was taking place in XIX century British Columbia and it just happened it was mentioned there. So I did some research and took it from there. Norum12:26, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
License tagging for Image:St. Agatha's Tower 001.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:St. Agatha's Tower 001.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. 05:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:197390990kpPsRO ph.jpg
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images 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. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BigDT23:06, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Zuleyka1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- tariqabjotu (joturner) 03:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images 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. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 10:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Zuleyka1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 09:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I noticed that you have removed the licensing information from your picture, Image:197390990kpPsRO ph.jpg. Please note that even self-pics must have a licensing tag. Please consider adding an appropriate license, such as {{GFDL-self}} or {{PD-self}}, in order to avoid having your picture deleted. Thank you. BigDT15:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Daniel1.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. 21:04, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Somaliland map.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Angr13:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:PICT0012a.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Hi. I noticed that you re-uploaded this image after it was deleted. Do you plan to use the image? Wikipedia is not free webhosting. Specifically, the policy says, "Please upload only files that are used (or will be used) in encyclopedia articles or project pages; anything else will be deleted." If this image has an encyclopedic use or if you would like to use it on your userpage, there's nothing wrong with that, but if it is not going to be used, Wikipedia is not a free webhost. BigDT00:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
one image for a userpage is fine...but three images is overkill, I think. I tagged that image accordingly as a repost and it has since been deleted, but you still have two ohter images of yourself. Hbdragon8803:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Winnehand.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thanks for uploading Image:Świętopełk II the Great.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200ptalk14:33, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. If I may make a small request of you, there are about two dozen political party names to translate in that template. I'm not asking for articles, though we do need those eventually–just English names would be enough for now. If you can undertake this task, thank you very much. Biruitorul20:29, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Marek_Grechuta.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial.
If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it, but use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.
If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.
The song's title (regardless of transliteration from Polish to English) is, in fact "Minus Zero", not "Less Than Zero". It may be that the correct translation of the original Polish song title to English is "Less Than Zero", but the English version is entitled "Minus Zero". That is the English title. That is the refrain. That is what he sings. That is the track listing on the American release. Have you not heard the English version? "Minus Zero"ExRat05:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The bottom line is, regardless of what he sings, whoever translated the song into English, did a very shoddy job. And it noted in the article that the song in slightly incorrect. Norum19:38, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:A.Lilja.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. – Quadell(talk) (random)15:59, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your concern. After some discussion on IRC, and some actions by the administrative team, I think things are settled down a bit. If you have any remaining or further problems, feel free to contact me, or to request assistance at WP:AIV if I'm otherwise occupied. Luna Santin08:30, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia! We could really use your help to create new content, but your recent additions do not assert the notability of their subjects and have been reverted or removed. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Please do not re-add this material into the article in the future. It's been removed twice now. Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors. See Wikipedia:Assume good faith for the guidelines on this..
Please avoid using abusive edit summaries as per Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Thanks and happy editing.Yankees7607:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As was mentioned, one regular season loss is not permanently encyclopedic. The loss has no historical significance, didn't break any records, or contain any individual acheivements that broke a record or can be considered notable. Yankees7614:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So have you gone around to each and every team the Leafs have defeated for their first loss and posted it on that article too? While you're at it can you update the article with Buffalo's first lost for the 87-88 season as well? Or even last season? Obviously that's a joke, but doing so would be about as assinine. Again, it's not permanently encyclopedic, and it's not of historical significance. Yankees7600:01, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Look, please don't get upset. You can create the article on who I assume is a mayor of Hamilton, but please do so with text. It simply can't stay with just category links. Can you add a bit of biographical info and a stub notice before an other admin clobbers it? - Lucky 6.904:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that when you cleaned up the vandalism in the Kazakhstan article, in [2] you apparently ended up accidentally blanking it instead of reverting it back to the previous version. In the future, if you want to clean up vandalism, find the most recent version before the vandalism from the history, click on edit this page, and save. This should prevent accidentally introducing inaccuracies when trying to clear up vandalism.
Thanks for uploading Image:Litvinienko.jpg. The image description 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.
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 fair use images 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.
I'm sorry to answer so late but it was a mistake i did deleting your image on the Tunis article...
I was still learning how to edit the wiki articles then...
License tagging for Image:Daniel von Jungingen1.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Daniel von Jungingen1.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. 10:06, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
The corret spelling is Catalan. And yes, I too am a believer in the Columbus was Catalan theory. His name is Colom in and around Barcelona and I have 100's of cousins in Spain who think we are correct and those who believe otherwise are morons.
Thanks for uploading Image:Litvinienko.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 BJBot13:44, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for uploading Image:Tommy04.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.
It's not enough to tag images as "courtesy of ..." unless the images really are released for free use and according to the web page tommynilsson.se all of its content is copyrighted to Sony BMG. --Strangnet05:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The site you use as source for her weight lists her height wrongly as 172 cm. She is 170 cm tall, and the newspaper SvD ([3]) lists her weight as 81 kg together with the correct height. Which has more authority - a geocities web page written by AverageJoe or one of Sweden's largest daily newspapers? Since not even her official web page lists her weight, I think the weight should be removed altogether because I believe it differs throughout the season. --Strangnet18:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
We've removed the weight since it's impossible to be absolutely sure about her weight, and then there's the question whether it's necessary to include such data in a biographical entry in Wikipedia. --Strangnet12:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You've changed this repeatedly from Umeå to Tärnaby without taking into account what she states on her own web page - she is in fact born in Umeå and nowhere else. --Strangnet08:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You updated this footballer's page and Deaths in 2007 with news of his death, but the dates were different – when i checked Google news to see which was right, i couldn't find any information on either. i've reverted the pages just now cuz we have to be a bit careful about what we write about living folk, but feel free to re-revert if you have a source to support the death. W guice15:46, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright problems with Image:Francys Barraza Sudnicka.jpg
An image that you uploaded, Image:Francys Barraza Sudnicka.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Butseriouslyfolks04:00, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Winnehand.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.
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 fair use images 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. Butseriouslyfolks04:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Gross5.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.
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 fair use images 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. Butseriouslyfolks04:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for uploading Image:PICT0012a.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
It is a violation because you say 'the funny thing is' in relation to comments made and then say 'the apple never falls far from the tree' which is also implying something negative without a source. We have to be careful on articles about biographies of living people.-Localzuk(talk)21:49, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:PICT0080.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
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 name 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! --Butseriouslyfolks04:15, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to my user talk page. I have to go into the history every time I want to leave you back a message. But looking at your contribs, your posts on article talk pages also have your name as a non-link. Do you have your signature set to something odd in your preferences? It should be blank unless you have one of those fancy signatures. --Butseriouslyfolks04:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Back in 06 you started the article Günther von Schwarzenberg, reading "Günther von Schwarzenberg was the eighth Grand Master of the Teutonic Order. was the eighth Grand Master of the Teutonic Order." However, the WP articles on Grand masters of the Teutonic Order and the individual grand masters (& the corresponding articles in the German WP, list he eighth master as Günther von Wüllersleben. Probably what you have is an alternate form of the name--do you remember where you found it so we can do a redirect?DGG22:47, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on this page, by Gay Cdn, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because the article is a page created primarily to disparage its subject or a biography of a living person that is controversial in tone and unsourced, where there is no neutral point of view version in the history to revert to. (CSD G10).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting the article, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 201:43, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Further to your comment on my talk page, I tagged an image you had uploaded for speedy deletion, not your user page. The image was orphaned and disparaged a living person, somthing in violation of WP:BLP. If you wish to dispute the deletion, I suggest following up on the deletion review page.--User:Gay Cdn(talk)(Contr)15:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
License tagging for Image:Szczeliniec Wielki 1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Szczeliniec Wielki 1.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. 04:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I saw your comment on Talk:Mike Ilitch (Yes, I know it's old) and just wanted to know, what's so bad about being born in America? I'm not angry, it doesn't bother me at all...I just want to know why you say that. BsroiaadnTalk22:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Go to the page and take a look. Sign up on the members page. It seems that a lot of the current player articles are small. Checkout the references etc. Kingjeff22:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I stand corrected on the membership of the group, however according to the Wikipedia External Policy, links to "Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), discussion forums" are supposed to be avoided. The Yahoo Groups page in question would definately fall under this criteria. Corpx05:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for your message. In regards to Steven Adler, just because he happens to have a surname that is typically German doesn't mean he's German or German-American. You can't just deduce it from the name itself without any other information. Especially since he got the name from his stepfather. Unless you have an actual verifiable source that can prove this, it's unsourced and does not belong there. I did some research myself, and the only two things I could find were that Adler is Jewish (here, an interview with Adler's brother, who mentions their mother is Jewish [4]) and has some Icelandic heritage. (here, about halfway down the page: Steven: My grandfather is from Iceland actually![5])DanielEng08:00, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:New brent.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.
Thanks for uploading Image:New brent.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. BetacommandBot14:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Kudowa - emblem.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Kudowa - emblem.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:29, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Kid Paddle.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Kid Paddle.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.
Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Denninger's, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 18:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Norum! I'd like to call your attention to the WikiProject Germany and the German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board. I hope their links, sub-projects and discussions are interesting and even helpful to you. If not, I hope that new ones will be.
Thanks for uploading Image:Company name.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) 01:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for uploading Image:Ladypank4.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
A tag has been placed on Image:Cherie 4.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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Cherie 4.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) 20:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:IMG 0391.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Hi Norum!
We thank you for uploading Image:IMG 0366.JPG, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.
Thanks for uploading Image:IMG 0366.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Photo2.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) 00:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why you left me this message, but this is not my photo. I didn't even upload it.
Thanks for uploading Image:Crha.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.
I am concerned that the article is becoming a fansite and PR puff piece. Lets work together that her fans no not remove relevant materical such as her poor reviews by the BBC and all other media outlets and the radio 'is she a man' controversy. She is also not Polish but American-Polish. Eurovisionman (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Forget the fact that she's Polish-American, but I think the paragraph about her being a man should be included in the article as this is quite relevant.
Get your facts straight before you have a go at people, the follow extracting is from the main Euro 2008 which has the source to the pdf from UEFA, so croatia are group winners!
(According to the official UEFA rules for the tournament[12], the following tie-breaking criteria will apply should two or more teams from the same group finish with an equal number of points:
Number of points earned in matches between the teams in question;
Goal difference in matches between the teams in question;
Goals scored in matches between the teams in question;
Goal difference in all group matches;
Goals scored in all group matches;
In cases where exactly two teams are equal in all previously listed critera and play one another to a draw in their final group match, kicks from the penalty mark will be conducted in lieu of the remaining criteria;
Coefficient from the qualifying competitions for the 2006 FIFA World Cup and 2006/08 UEFA European Football Championship (points obtained divided by the number of matches played);
Fair play conduct of the teams in the group stage;
Drawing of lots)
MotorSportMCMXC (talk) 05:39, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know TSN reported that he has been offered that contract, but it's all rumors and reports at this time. And Jagr himself has recently denied the report. [6], so let's just refrain from adding anything controversial for now.. July is just a few days away.. IrisKawling (talk) 20:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Old train station building.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
If she is a Finnish citizen, why can she not be described as Finnish? You note that she is not white, but I'm not sure how that is relevant. Can you explain, here or on the article talkpage, before reverting again? Thanks, Avruch T 19:11, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Being a citizen of a specific country does not mean the same as being a native of that country.
She is still a Somali with a Finnish citizenship.
The article was previously deleted after a deletion discussion, making it eligible for speedy deletion. Reviewing your version of the article and comparing it to the deleted one, I didn't see any evidence of notability in yours that wasn't in the deleted one, so I deleted. You can take it to deletion review if you believe that my decision was in error. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 00:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to Puma Swede. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Do not move the article to her "official name" unless you can provide reliable sources to verify the notability of her name.Morbidthoughts (talk) 08:11, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you feel that the category "African Americans" is appropriate for Elvis Presley? The article, itself, makes no mention of the man being or claiming to be African American, nor of any such allegations. Tim Ross(talk)11:24, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's what the article is missing, but he did have black blood in him. I just need to get a source for that first. Norum (talk) 12:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
File:Ggantija Temples.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Ggantija Temples (1).jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Ggantija Temples (1).jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 05:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Bagaregården hilltop.jpg. 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.
Thanks for uploading File:Bagaregården.jpg. 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.
Thank you for uploading File:Bagaregården hilltop.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
Hi. Yes, I'm from Georgia, but I don't think that you really know what I want. First, neither Europe not Asia are strict geographic term; second, the Europe-Asia boundary depends on its definition and the Caucasus crest is not the sole defining entity. Third, a portion of Georgia does lie north of it. For further information, please check Talk:Georgia (country). The issue has been discussed there ad nauseam. Cheers, --KoberTalk04:13, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're half-right. See my response at Talk:Jiří Hudler. If you want to add a note about the arbitration (and can reliably source it) please do. Otherwise, just because he is going through arbitration does not make the fact that he signed a contract untrue. - Rjd0060 (talk) 13:54, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What is the meaning of this? I bring up a very important issue in the series and all I get is having my section removed and get warned? I used the term "turban heads" on purpose to prove a point and you just did it by deleting the whole thing. Wikipedia is intolerant towards racism. It is really sad to see that. I am going to take this issue higher for not bringing the racism issue and for threatening me for trying to bring this up.
Norum (talk) 22:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You said yourself, "I just wanted to bring this up. Nothing else." This is not a forum for discussing possibly, unsourced, your own original research about what is racism and what is not. As I said before, Burns might like Carl better than Lenny, so that is why he helped him, not cause Carl is black. In fact, how many white people do you know that are racist against white people? You thinking Burns is racist against other white people is ignorant. CTJF83Talk23:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK,maybe i did not form the sentence properly, but the issue is still there. And yes, it would be nothing unusual if a white person was being racist towards another white person. For example, people from civilized European countries are (not always, but it happens a lot) towards white people from the poorer European countries like Albania, Bulgaria and Romania. It happens quite frequently when they move to other countries. Then there is the gypsy issue, but that does not belong here as they are non white minority. And racism also happens among blacks as well. Not to mention that racism is not only white people towards coloured one, but also coloured peopel towards whites.
But going back to the Simpsons, here are a couple of links.
http://www.cinematical.com/2007/07/17/the-guardian-asks-is-the-simpsons-character-apu-racist/http://resistracism.wordpress.com/2007/07/09/racism-as-entertainment/Norum (talk) 00:20, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I think you don't know exactly the geographical borders of Europe and Asia. Turkey is a transcontinental country, it lies in both Europe and Asia like Russia. Please stop moving Turkey from the List of European countries. That list also includes geographically Asian, but politically European countries like Cyprus, and Armenia. See here for more information --Turkish Flame☎16:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Even if the readers ignore the footnote, they 100% look at this map. Also, the introduction paragraph tells us Turkey, Russia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, etc. are both part of Europe and Asia. It's clear enough. --Turkish Flame☎05:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent edit to the page Toronto appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any other tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. Johnny Au(talk/contributions)03:46, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And it's been corrected again by another editor. Please note the Toronto article is talking about the city, municipality, not the agglomeration which is what you are pointing at. Not the same thing. Canterbury Tailtalk16:35, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Where's your source that Jessica May's ethnicity is Czech? How do you know her parents weren't German or Slovak? Wouldn't it be more factual to instead put people's nationality in the nationality field? Also, if you insist on removing Caucasian from articles, could you at least mark the skin colour as white? Epbr123 (talk) 09:10, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Think about it for a moment, there is no such thing as caucasian ethnicity. Ethnicity does not refer to the race and "caucasian" refers to the white race. Norum (talk) 10:06, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are various definitions of ethnicity, and one of them is race. You're making articles less informative by replacing people's race with nationality, when their nationality is already mentioned elsewhere. Epbr123 (talk) 12:37, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No. If the info shows an actual ethnic information, then obviously that is more informative than if it only said "skin colour - white". I mean, think about it....white people are everywhere so if we only state that the person's skin colour is white, it doesnt really help us in anything. If we write that the person's ethnicity is czech, hungarian, swedish or whatever, we know where that person originates from. C'mon, that's common sense. Norum (talk) 15:00, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article already says where they come from in the birth location field. What's the point of repeating it, especially at the expense of other info? Epbr123 (talk) 16:29, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I kinda led myself back to square 1....but it is easy to distinguish between slavic and germanic names, not to mention Czech and Slovak. But I have to give you the credit for this. I believe she is actually ethnic Hungarian born on the Czechoslovakian territory. I've seen it somewhere, but not enough proof. But therefore, this leads us to your reply. Ethnicity does not refer to race. An ethnic group is a group of humans whose members identify with each other, through a common heritage. Before 1900, race and ethnicity were often seen as two aspects of the same thing. With the introduction of ethnicity as a social construct, race and ethnicity were divided from each other. Norum (talk) 17:57, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then would you mind reverting your revert to Jessica May? I was trying to compromise by putting her race in the skin colour field rather than the ethnicity field. Epbr123 (talk) 18:33, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not edit war, as you seem to be doing at Talk:Barack Obama. Two editors have reverted your attempt to question Obama's religion as being fully answered by question #1 in the FAQ. That should be a sign that other editors consider further discussion unhelpful. Also please note from that talk page that the article is on probation, which means a heightened scrutiny of edits that may be considered disruptive. Looking over some of your other recent edits I see you are advancing some rather controversial positions about race, religion, and ethnicity. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but you do need to tone down the combativeness of some of your edits and edit summaries if you want to work successfully with other editors here. Thanks, - Wikidemon (talk) 21:20, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see you've repeated the question yet again. You are advancing a WP:FRINGE and borderline bigoted conspiracy theory here, with no more evidence (per your talk page) than your own opinion of a wording slip made in an interview. Please refer to Q1 in the FAQ list at the top of the Obama talk page, as other editors have repeatedly urged you to do. If you ask it one more time you will have violated WP:3RR and you will likely be blocked by an administrator from further editing the encyclopedia. Elsewhere you show a pattern of controversial edits that are somewhat suspect as far as anti-Muslim bigotry. That makes your edit history open for review. - Wikidemon (talk) 21:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Final warning - you need to stop now. You have now broken the WP:3RR policy. This tit-for-tat warning on my talk page is just plain tendentious.[7] We have all tried being polite and respectful towards you but we are not getting through here. Unless you indicate here that you are not going to further edit war, you will likely be blocked from further editing. Given the nature of your edits, it may be longer than the usual temporary block. - Wikidemon (talk) 21:44, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Look, I just gave you a freaking reliable link. You obviously havent even bothered to watch this as you just repeated the same information after I gave you a reliable source. Norum (talk) 21:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Barack Obama. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Please do not change the religion of a person in a biographical article without a proper reliable source. (So this is technically uncited removal of material.) Thank you.A More Perfect Onion (talk) 21:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have officially requested to have that report removed as my reverts were based on a reliable source, for which I provided a link. It was Obama's interview with ABC and I think that is a pretty reliable source. I was trying to officially request the move and the removal of the incorrect info, but Wikidemon kept reverting my official request. Therefore no solid ground to warn or ban me.
I left a message on his wall asking him about this, but all he did was to keep ignore me and remove my message once again. So why shoudl I pay the consequence for him ignoring the proven facts?Norum (talk) 22:08, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please focus on your own edits and do not make accusations about other editors here. For the record, your claims about my edits are completely wrong. At least three editors reverted your disruptive edit from the Obama page and your argumentative question from the talk page, and I am not one of them. I responded above to your tit-for-tat warning on my talk page. Also, your personal observations regarding the contents of a video are not a reliable source, even if the video itself were. This video, an interview in which Obama talks about himself, is not a reliable source regarding claims about Obama. Further, your interpretation of an obvious word slip, which Obama corrected moments after making it, to be an "admission" that Obama is Muslim is farfetched to the point of absurdity. Together with your pattern of seeming anti-Muslim edits, and the fact that the material you are trying to advance about Obama's supposedly being Muslim is a borderline racist fringe conspiracy theory, this can give a reasonable observer the impression that you are not here to improve the encyclopedia. Note that there is no WP:3RR exception for adding content even if it were reliably sourced. Look, we are not here to argue with you, we are here to caution you that if you continue (and at this point, unless you quickly tell us that you're done edit warring) you are likely to be blocked. That's how it is, and accusing everyone else of things is going to hurt your case, not help it. - Wikidemon (talk) 22:24, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please read Wikidemon's comments carefully above. In addition, please see Talk:Barack Obama/FAQ. Your talk page edits was properly removed to prevent further disruption. As stated previously, the article is on probation; "to avoid being subject to remedies":
* Do not edit-war; * Avoid making repeated comments unrelated to bettering the article; * Not much leeway in pages under probation, so basically be a model Wikipedian;
I do not see where you come up with the anti-muslim thing. Maybe you are referring to my comment I made the prophet Muhammad. I don't know if that is it, but yes, by today's standards he would be classified as a pedophile because his wife was only 9 years old when they "consumed" their marriage.
Anyways, the bottom line is, that the link I provided was a reliable source as it was ABC and you and the others kept ignoring it. And Obama was "corrected" after he said it the second time, which can create a lot of questions itself. Can yo uexplain the thing with the article being on probation? Perhaps I missed something? Norum (talk) 22:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Obama-related articles are on community-imposed probation due to excessive edit warring, incivility, fake accounts, and arguing on those articles in 2008. You can follow the links from the probation notice at the top of the talk page. Edit warring is not good on any article, but there are more eyes on the Obama pages, and less tolerance. You may not think you are being anti-Muslim by equating the prophet Muhammad to a pedophile, saying that Yasser Arafat is not of Palestinian nationality (which would make him a man without a nation) because the Palestinian lands are "measly territory",[8] or that "muslims are a big problem throughtout all of Germany".[9] I am careful not to accuse you of racism here, but the edits you are making, positions you are advocating, and the words you have been using to summarize your edits, are very uncomfortable racially and as I said could be inferred to be racist. If you want smoother sailing here it's best to be more careful about those comments, perhaps to think how a Muslim might take them, or how it would look in a different context similar comments were made about your own minority (on the English Wikipedia) race / religion / nationality. - Wikidemon (talk) 23:02, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize if my recent comments and edits made it look as as me being anti-Muslim. I mean if he was married to a 9 year old, then it does speak for itself. But that applies to everybody, not necessarily to one ethnic or religious group. As for my comment/edit about Palestine, it is a territory, not an independent country, therefore Arafat could not be a national of Palestine. As for the term "measly", that was more to compare the difference between the two terms, same as for the difference between a territorial/state/provincial and a federal government. And as for my comment about Muslims being a big problem throughout all of Germany. It is not only there as it is in most of Europe as well. In so many cities, Muslim are close to 30% of the cities total population. In cities like Göteborg, Malmö and Stockholm, that number is around 25% and the thing is, that in a couple of decades, these cities will become muslim. But this is about quoting the statistics. Again, my apologies for any misunderstandings and problems that this all caused. Norum (talk) 23:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Important questions:
Do you understand the WP:3RR policy now, and understand that WP:RS does not provide an exception or allowance for more than 3 reverts in a day?
Do you understand that you can be sanction for edit warring for less than 3 reverts in a day (in other words, you don't get an "allowance" of 3 reverts to use up each day, but instead are supposed to discuss things on talk pages, per WP:BRD)?
Do you understand that the Obama articles have even less tolerance for disruptive editing than most articles?
I apologize for sounding stern, but you left a comment on the Edit Warring Notice board which left me unclear if you understood the above - especially given your responses to good faith warnings from other editors (e.g., "Whatever. And please stop spying on me. Norum (talk) 2:24 pm, Today (UTC−7)"). Thanks in advance for a quick reply. Cheers, --4wajzkd02 (talk) 23:32, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can clearly say that I did not know about many things, especially about the 3 reverts in a day policy. I knew about the ban policy on vandalism, but did not know it applies to the reverts as well. As for the "whatever" comment, I admit that I got aggravated when I first read the warning. Norum (talk) 00:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Norum. It would be to your benefit to leave a comment at WP:AN3#User: Norum reported by User:4wajzkd02 (Result: ) to promise that you will not keep discussing Obama's alleged Muslim faith on the article Talk page. You provide a Youtube video showing Obama making a slip of the tongue about his religion, which is likely to convince no-one. The issue of Obama's religion has been heavily discussed, both in the media and on Wikipedia, and you are unlikely to succeed in a one-man crusade to get that changed. You can still be blocked for disruption if you won't agree to leave this issue alone. EdJohnston (talk) 17:07, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I have just made a statement on the other page where I promised not to continue with the subject (among other things) and I have noticed it was just after you made your last comment where you said the case was closed. Thank you. Norum 19:00, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Nadine Jansen. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadine Jansen. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Norum! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 4 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 97 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
No, in fact the point that her mother was German does not make her German-American. Please see MOS:BIO, which covers this under Nationality & ethnicity – In the normal case this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen or national, or was a citizen when the person became notable. This doesn't mean the country in which her mother was born. Bullock was born in the United States. She is an American citizen. To my knowledge, she has not become a German citizen, therefore, she is not a "German-American". Wildhartlivie (talk) 12:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it does. She's got two ethinicities, German and American. German-American does not only refer to nationalities, but ethnicity as well.
For example: a person born in the USA to, lets say, Italian parents, are still (ethnically) Italian, therefore making them Italian-American. Norum14:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to James Belushi. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Advice - The editor, who visited your page prior to me, explained MOS BIO to you. Please do not add additional nationalities to articles as only one is used. --Morenooso (talk) 03:18, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You vandalized the page by removing the correct information. Besides his Albanian background, Belushi has a dual citizenship as well, therefore making him Albanian - American. Thank you. Norum17:07, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And no, nobody explained anythign else after. I just changed the info to the proper one and then i received your message. Norum21:04, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File copyright problem with File:080818-Sparvagnskarta.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:080818-Sparvagnskarta.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
Thank you for uploading File:Vasakyrkangöteborg.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
Thanks for uploading File:080818-Sparvagnskarta.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
<-- Hi Norum, I was unable to find an email in our Permissions system that gave permission for the image. If you sent one could you provide me with the ticket number or perhaps the email address you sent it from? If you would prefer you can email me the information privately by going to Special:EmailUser/Jamesofur after confirming an email to this account. If you haven't sent one yet if you could send it to permissions-enwikimedia.org and letting me know (either here or on User talk:Jamesofur that would be great and I can look into the system and verify the permission on the page so that it doesn't get deleted. Thanks again for your help, I know the process can be a little daunting but we try to respect the copyright of everyone involved as strongly as possible. James (TC)09:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for uploading File:Czakon3 - Albrecht von Hohenzollern.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, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
Thank you for uploading File:Hermann von Salza1.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, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
Thank you for uploading File:Czakon3 - Albrecht von Hohenzollern.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, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
Thank you for uploading File:Hermann von Salza1.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, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
I have nominated Cherie (pornographic actress), 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/Cherie (pornographic actress). 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 see MOS:BIO, which covers this under Nationality & ethnicity – In the normal case this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen or national, or was a citizen when the person became notable. This doesn't mean the country in which the person's ancestors were born. Cassavetes was born in the United States. He was an American citizen. Still, ethnically yes, he was Greek. Norum23:52, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cassavetes was a well known Greek-American actor. I don't know about Lorenzo but Cassavetes's ethnicity is relevant to mention in the lede. Dr.K.λogosπraxis00:06, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To avoid further edit-warring and possible violations of the 3 revert rule WP:3RR, which you are close to violating and without making any attempt at discussion, I invite you at the talk page of John Cassavetes to discuss your edits. Dr.K.λogosπraxis03:18, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You have already been reported to others for vandalism. The same case applies for people like Joe Pesci, Sandra Bullock and Bruce Willis. Just because one of their ancestors is either Italian or German, it does not make them Italian - American or German - American.
So you are the one vandalising, because of recurring edits from MOS:BIO plus the 3 revert rule WP:3RR as well. Norum07:02, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As you ought to know, removing cited facts without giving a reason and without discussing your removal of these facts on the article talkpage is considered vandalism. Adding cited facts and opening a discussion on talk is not considered vandalism, quite the opposite; it is how we do business here in Wikipedia. I invite you yet again to answer my points that I raise on the Cassavetes article talkpage. If you repeat your bad faith vandalism allegations against me I will report you. Dr.K.λogosπraxis15:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Norum, I saw your posting at Moreno's talk page and not wanting to disturb him I reply on your talk to the points you raised on Moreno's talk. You may have quoted MOSBIO to me but MOSBIO does not state citizenship exclusively but also mentions:
Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.
and I think that part of Cassavetes's notability was due to his ethnic background due to the fact that the Guardian article clearly mentions the connection between his work and his ethnicity, thus satisfying the quote from MOSBIO. However why don't we move the discussion from your talkpage to the more relevant venue at Talk:John Cassavetes#Including Cassavetes's ethnicity on the lede, so that we give the opportunity to more editors to express their ideas on the matter. Dr.K.λogosπraxis01:33, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know which part of my edit you don't understand, but the infobox in Rosberg's article is a Formula One infobox, nothing else. He only raced as a German in F1, so the Finnish flag has no place in it. He did, as you say, race as a Finn in lower formulae, so if you want to put the Finnish flag anywhere, add an infobox for his earlier career and put it there, with all his earlier career stats, as has been done for other drivers. That is how it works, quite obviously, I would have thought.
Furthermore, you accused me of vandalism in your edit summary when there is clearly no hint of vandalism. You need to tread very carefully when doing that, as you are failing WP:AGF and if you continue to do it, I shall take it elsewhere. You might also read Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle which is aimed at avoiding edit wars. Bretonbanquet (talk) 10:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The part for nationality is above the info box, the F1 info is underneath it. Therefore, those are two separate pieces of info (not only about F1) and both nationalities should be included. Norum14:03, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I saw it now. I have reverted it to my original picture, but since you have separated it, it is okay to delete the picture in question. Norum02:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've actually re-reverted it back to the Nile photo, since that's the photo under discussion at PUF, and to put the castle pic back on kind of defeats the purpose of the nomination. I'm pretty sure the Nile photo will get deleted, but that's really the only version of the file "in play" for this. SchuminWeb (Talk) 06:59, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed you removed the Jewish categories under this article. I found an article that's a profile of his brother (the article mentions they're brothers) in which the brother attests to his Jewishness. Is that enough? A citation to that article is on Talk:Yakov Kreizberg. -- kosboot (talk) 14:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As part of a larger process of phasing out non-descriptive filenames, your upload File:PICT0080.jpg has been renamed File:Norum.jpeg. Other than the name, nothing about the file has been changed. Sven ManguardWha?08:35, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In response to this edit: I understand that his mother is from Sweden. But the article currently has no source to show that he is eligible to represent Sweden (or Cameroon) in international competition. On the other hand, Noah has actually been on the French squad [10] and is a French citizen. If you have a problem with the article, please discuss things on the article talk page. Zagalejo^^^21:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Scratch part of that - there was a source (further down) that mentioned that he could play for Sweden. Still, there has been a lot of discussion over the years over what to put for his nationality, so I think it is best for you to take your comments to the article talk page. There is a very clear case for describing him as American and French, but it's debatable whether he should be described as Swedish. Zagalejo^^^21:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For right now, I'm going to remove the nationality from the lead and infobox. Let's try to work things out on the talk page. Zagalejo^^^21:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It wasnt really about which team is is eligible to play for, but the fact that it reads "American-French". Norum21:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Anna Månsdotter's Execution.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Well, I switched the sentence from Russian/Canadian to Soviet/Russian and he reverted it back. True, Korolev had a Canadian citizenship, but that wasnt until 2000. He only played for USSR/Russia and never played for team Canada. Norum00:24, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You have asked Ravenswing to stop editing your talk page, and he has done the same for you. If you wish your own requests to be followed, then do the same for others. Multiple editors have now asked you to disengage. Your continued edits to his talk page, including attempting to blank your own comments, are not indicative of an editor willing to move on. I will suggest to you the same thing I suggested to him: just leave him be. Surely there are better things you can be doing with your Wikitime? Resolute04:21, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I did so earlier, I deleted all my posts from his wall so I do not see what the problem is anymore? Also, if he keep insisting on leaving Korolev as Russian-Canadian, why won't he go and check Wayne Gretzky's page. It only states that Gretzky is a canadian player, despite the fact he's got dual citizenship. I thought Ravenswing was into the ice hockey topic, so I just found a subject for him to go and deal with him. He should make the change to "Canadian-American".
This also proves him wrong where he stated that US does not allow dual citizenship, where it clearly does. I proved it to him, but it was inconvenient information for him, so he opted to delete it.
But I wish him luck in his future endeavors. Norum06:51, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gretzky doesn't have dual citizenship. If you read the thread on the talk page there is a source in the article where Gretzky himself specifically says he does not have American citizenship. Just so you know. Also there was no edit where you proved him wrong that he deleted. I went through both of your edit histories. As Resolute says its best if you just disengage from the situation and move on to whatever else it is you like to do on the wiki. -DJSasso (talk) 11:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Do you actually believe in such a fairy tale? The guy has been living in the US for half of his life and he doesn't have a US citizenship? Cmon, use your common sense. Do you actually believe he's been applying for his green card over and over? It would be much easier if he had owned any companies in the US and didn't he own half of the Coyotes? Norum13:52, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia does not work on assumptions. At any rate, I am not interested in re-starting that debate. I am only interested in having the both of you let this go. Resolute13:55, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like you lost, huh? Rodham is still there. By the looks of your page...you get overruled often.
Just because you say so?....whatever bud, you don't even have the guts to publish your name....or maybe you just dont know how...lol... Norum05:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And if Wikipedia consider i.e a Pole with triple citizenship as Polish - Canadian - Peruvian then obviouslyy Wiki needs to re think its all. Norum07:03, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You have not nominated it for deletion. There is no second nomination page linking to the article. If you want to complete the nomination, follow procedure and do it correctly. Make sure that the AFD tag at the top of the page does not link to an old AFD discussion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:25, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Several months ago you initiated a discussion disputing the nationality of Mika Zibanejad. You took the stance that he is not Swedish and no one agreed with you. I thought the discussion was over, yet here you are still attempting to change his nationality in the article. That is where you know me from. By the way, you may want to re-read Wikipedia:Civility. Have a Merry Christmas. Freshfighter9talk19:03, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Don't call me a vandal again or I will seek sanctions against you. I have no idea what your problem is, but resolve it without offensive name calling. Barsoomian (talk) 18:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Are you threatening me? Go ahead and seek sanctions against me. You have reverted the information twice already. Myers has dual citizenship and it has been proved, therefore following Wikipedia's policy, he is to be considered a "British-Canadian". Norum18:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did not do anything for you to warn me. As a matter of fact, one more revert and you will be violating Wikipedia's 3RR rule. Norum19:08, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If someone disagrees with you you on a content issue that doesn't make them a "vandal". For you to use this word repeatedly is a deliberate insult and incivility and I will not tolerate it if you repeat it. You have reverted 3 times, I'm not going to war with you over the triviality of the ethnicity of celebrities, something that seems to obsess you from your history here. Barsoomian (talk) 05:31, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have used it once as you have reverted verified and correct information. The reason why I have "reverted it" was because you reverted it from a correct information. And if you followed my hisotry, you would have noticed that I was once just like you. Check the entry on Igor Korolev. technically he should have been considered to be Russian only as thats where he was born, grew up and played most of his hockey. But for the fact that he was also a canadian citizen, and following Wiki guidelines, he has to be considered to be Russian - Canadian.
As for Mike Myers, it is slightly different. He's got dual citizenship, both of his parents were born and grew up in England and Mike Myers himself spent some time in England. Norum05:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
1) There is no citation for this "dual citizenship". 2) None of that gives you the right to call me a vandal. Discuss the issue, on the article talk page, do not abuse and label other editors who disagree with you. You escalated trivial content issues to personal attacks. Maybe you enjoy reverting people with insulting comments and threats, it will rebound on you. I will not discuss this here any more, since you are 100% convinced of your righteousness. If you attack me again I will make a formal complaint. Barsoomian (talk) 06:03, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There was a citation and you removed it. I had to put it back there. Violating the the 3RR rule can lead to a suspension. So far you have reverted it twice. If you know how to correct the citation, be my guest. But it clearly states there that Myers has a dual citizenship and that he, himself, considers himself more British than Canadian. I suggest reading the whole article before you revert again. Norum06:19, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. When you recently edited Igor Korolev, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, while removing something from an article's leading part, please be sure you explained everything on article's talk and the removal is consensused. If assume good faith, your removal seems at least POV. Gazifikator (talk) 04:53, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
No, this was a violation of MOS: BIO. True, he was born to Armenian immigrants, but he was born in France and holds a French citizenship. Therefore a French artist. It is the same as if saying that Jim Belushi is an American-Albanian actor. He was born in the US, but to Albanian immigrant parents, therefore he is an American actor. I also explained that the original entry was a violation of MOS: BIO. I suggest that you read it before re reverting.[reply]
Context (location, nationality, or ethnicity);
- In most modern-day cases this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen, national or permanent resident, or if notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national or permanent resident when the person became notable.
- Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability.
No, you're completely not right. Why start an editwarring while you simply could search sources? Aznavour is not only a citizen of Armenia [12] (by the way, he hes dual citizenship of Armenia and Switzerland), but he is a highest diplomatic representative (ambassador) of Armenia. Gazifikator (talk) 17:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tom Araya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Liam Lindström, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Swedish (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:Marsaxlokk port 2004.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion,
a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Idle, West Yorkshire, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Klaatu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lenna Kuurmaa 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:
'''Lenna Kuurmaa''' (born 26 September 1985<ref name="EPL">{{cite news|url=http://www.epl.ee/artikkel/476136|title=Lenna
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. You have been attempting to edit war your POV across several articles now. A number of editors oppose your change, clearly there is no consensus. Characterising those who oppose your edits as "vandals" is a violation of WP:NPA. Please step back, have a cup of tea, and move onto something more productive. --Nug (talk) 11:15, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Did you issue the same warning to the other people? They have been reverting to incorrect information and I am getting blamed for it? I request that Sander Säde and Jaan be warned as well since they are both in the wrong and have been reverting to incorrect information. Look at Alexei Zhitnik, Mikhail Shtalenkov and Dainius Zubrus to prove the point. Seems you and Jaan had nothing agaisnt the way his place of birth was listed. Also, I believe that Klõps should be added to this list as he is in violation of WP:NPA. I also believe that it is a new account of the other users involved in this dispute. Norum13:45, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That article has nothing to do with this issue. As i said, you can't go around and keep changing to the version that is more convenient for you. I understand that Estonians have background to hate Soviet Union/Russia, but there is no place for this on Wiki. The fact is,Estonia was a part of the Soviet Union and nothing will change that. Those born prior to gaining independence in 1991 were officially citizens of the Soviet Union. Norum16:20, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please WP:CIVIL, now You are just urging hatred :( You have been informed that it is in geographical terms, not political. It would still be written just Estonia even if there will be some unforeseen changes and tomorrow the name will be changed to lets say The Supernatural state of Estonia.
Secondly Wikipedia avoids political motivation: instead of Republic of the Union of Myanmar it says Burma. So why You need to name the illfated Puppet state that used to exist on the territory of Estonia?
Anyways, forget that. Puppet state or no puppet state, a fact is a fact. Anyone born in Estonia prior to 1991 was a citizen of the Soviet Union, since SU had control over the country. Look at Willi Brandt....are you or your mates gonna go and change that he was born in Germany? Germany as the country that we all know formed at the end of WW I, since until then it was the German Empire. You know what, forget it, do whatever you want. I don't care anymore. You want to put false info on Wiki? Be my guest. Norum17:09, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are very clever, but clearly this is again case of WP:OSE. As said before You are not the first person who has had this question, but as You won't open the links recommended for You then how about:
It's different with people born long ago when current establishments weren't formed... like Germany before 1871.
Sometimes German Empire, French Empire are used when it goes with historical background. (Here Estonian SSR fails notability as historical entity)
P.S. the soviet citizenship You like to mention... People born before 1992 could have had both Estonian and Soviet citizenship as Estonian citizenship still was inherited through jus sanguinis, but it is not related with infobox birthplace.
Then again, you are proven wrong again when you look at David Coulthard and Damon Hill. Ok, you make a good point with Germany and German Empire. However, this would not apply if a person was born during the Weimar Republic era. going back to the issue of Estonia being a Soviet Republic until 1991, let's say born in ...., Estonia, Soviet Union would do just fine then. Norum22:04, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Which evidence are there on my talkpage? I removed it because I didn't like like Your false accusations against me.
You wrote there false accusation against me of inserting incorrect information. The case of Estonia vs Estonian SSR as birthplace isn't about incorrect information but Your different view on writing birthplace. Neither of these isn't incorrect, but consensus is to write just Estonia.
You accused me being secondary profile of other users You have bone to pick with.
On Your last comment, as said million times before it is a case of WP:OSE (Dare to open the link and take a minute of contemplation.) You really found some articles that differ the manual of style. Now all the other articles need to be changed because of these? It is the place of birth informally not the official name of the state at the moment of birth.
If You think You are right find the project page and raise the issue there.
False accusations? You and your friends were the ones reverting to incorrect information. Also, seems to me that you and Nug are one person with a double account. Norum09:07, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
He has a German passport, played for Germany at the World Cup and one of his parents is German (see reference in the article). Please do not make false claims and stop your edit warring. --Jaellee (talk) 16:23, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Edit warring? You started it, not me. Don't try to blame something on me something that you started. Plus no, he is not German. There are no such thing as black Germans. So he is a national of Germany, but not an ethnic German.Norum17:08, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you claim that he played for Germany at the World Cup which is an utter lie. Please do not make false claims and stop your edit warring. Norum23:30, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Norum. You have new messages at Talk:Meb Keflezighi#Infobox. Message added 11:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Salustiano Sanchez, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hello, Norum. Editors have expressed concern that Peter Youngren contains material copied from outside sources, which is likely a violation of copyright law. I removed some recently added material, but another editor wonders if the 2006 version of the page, which you helped write, may contain material from published sources. If you would care to comment at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2014 April 24, I'm sure we would all appreciate it. Thanks, and happy editing. Cnilep (talk) 01:34, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In evaluating this request, I found likely additional copying: [13][14] and I have accepted the request. It looks like you have understood what you did wrong, so I won't block you. MER-C10:55, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I just looked up the other ones you pointed out. Looks like I actually was trying to create that article. It was Feb 2006. Wow, how the time flies. Norum14:22, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Though I choose not to get involved with the actual editing of those articles. I do support the position that we should use Soviet Union, as the Baltic states weren't independant from 1940 to 1991. GoodDay (talk) 12:32, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your support. Seems it's only the Estonians that are reverting this. If you look at people from other former Soviet republics, it always states that it was either a part of the S.U. at the time or it reads the place of birth, followed by the name of the Soviet Socialist Republic (i.e. Tallin, Estonian SSR).
FWIW, the deciding factor is who's involved. If you say that red is red, but 3 or more editors say red is blue, the result is going to be red is blue. It's just one of those things that's wrong about Wikipedia. There's very little you or I can do about it, less we want to risk getting blocked or worst. GoodDay (talk) 05:11, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)Hi, Norum! You asked me my opinion on this a while ago, so please excuse me for commenting here now. May I offer some advice: first, please don't describe other people's edits as vandalism unless they really are – that serves no purpose, and can only make things worse. Second, please don't come even close to edit-warring – the only place that can lead is a block. Third, if you feel strongly about this issue (and it seems that you do), then why not start an RfC to find out what other editors think? An RfC will attract comment from editors unconnected with Estonia, and should (if all goes well) lead to a lasting consensus which can be cited in any subsequent discussion. Of course, the result may not be the one you think right; in that case, you'd have to just accept that and move on. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:15, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As I already stated before on another point, someone has to be smarter and let it go. That's why I reversed my enries and let those babies have their toys. Mind you, Georgia was in exactly the same situation as the Baltic states and basically anybody born in Georgia during the Soviet era has just that written beside their place of birth. Just check Eduard Shevardnadze, Katie Melua and others. Exactly the same situation. So if they want to have incorrect info on Wiki, that's their problem, not mine. Not my monkey, not my circus. Norum14:16, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well the difference was that the Soviet annexation of Georgia and other Caucasian states, as repellant as it was, was recognized by the Western countries while the Soviet annexation of the Baltics mostly wasn't. Essentially of course there is no difference, the Soviet regime was criminal everywhere. Dorpater (talk) 19:46, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm SummerPhDv2.0. I noticed that you made a comment on the page User talk:Ratemonth that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page.
Thank you. SummerPhDv2.003:29, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Black pride for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article; not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Incivility as well. Talk pages are not a place to sit your grievances and disparage other editorsEvergreenFir(talk) Please {{re}} 16:34, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
are you for real? This was a valid statement and you turned it into a joke. No wonder Wikipedia is a left wing heaven. You are an example of what is wrong with Wikipedia. Sorry to burst your bubble. but what pride is NOT racist. Get used to it, buttercup. Norum17:09, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Again, article talk pages are for discussing improvements to the article, not the topic itself or complaining about other articles. Also you might want to read WP:NPOV and WP:TRUTH. We reflect what reliable sources say about a topic, not what we individually think about it. EvergreenFir(talk) Please {{re}} 20:32, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I did just that before t request splitting white pride into white power, but i was just brushed off. And I am suppsed t take Wikipedia seriously after crap like that happens. Norum02:32, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alexander Steen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Swedish. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Amrita Acharia, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ukrainian and Nepalese. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Thanks for uploading File:Google search.jpeg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
Acroterion is a hipocrite. First we solve the issue of me uploading a pic that he found apaprently to be racist, then he still blocks me. He calls it racial trolling, despite the fact that I was defending white people Acroterion should be barred for harrassement Norum17:39, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
Acroterion had no right to ban me as he had no reason. He called it racial trolling, but that was not the case. The picture in question clearly showed three different wikipedia entries on google, but that was it. Then it was deleted, yet he still he went back on his word and decided to ban me. As per WP:UPYES, I am entitled to display an image that i uploaded on my userpage. I request to have the ban removed as this was unjustified in the first place.Norum20:48, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Decline reason:
Your request for unblock doesn't indicate you understand the reason for the block or demonstrate that the potential for disruption has abated. Asserting you are right and engaging in personal attacks (see above UB request) is not helpful. Please be aware that excessive unblock requests with unchanged behavior may result in an admin locking your talk page for the duration of the block. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 22:31, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
You were blocked for reinstating the Google screenshot that I deleted (which you appear to believe constitutes proof of bias against white people) for your userpage (screenshots aren't permitted except under limited circumstances at best and never on userpages), disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, abuse of a talkpage as a forum to promote your views [15] and for aggressive behavior toward those who have expressed concern [16], [17], [18], [19]. Acroterion(talk)23:00, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Number 15? I stated that NP is a reliable source as it is one of Canada's largest publication and you're trying to use that agaisnt me? Also, you're calling #19 as being aggressive towards others who have expressed their concern? I replied to someone else, you butted in and then you're trying to use it agaisnt me? I thought bigotry is not allowed here, but that is exactly what you're doing. Just to let you know, I am looking to fill out a complaint agaisnt you for abusing your powers as an administrator. Norum18:38, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've warned you before about the use of non-free images in userspace. I've removed your Soldiers of Odin image from this talkpage and will nominate it for deletion unless an appropriate rationale is provided and it is used in article space. Acroterion(talk)01:03, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Non-free rationale for File:Soldiers-of-odin-dalarna-bild-1.jpg
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Acroterion(talk)01:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Soldiers-of-odin-dalarna-bild-1.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).
Hello, Norum. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your user page at User:Norum may not meet Wikipedia's user page guideline. If you believe that your user page does not violate our guideline, please leave a note on this page. Alternatively you may add {{Db-u1}} to the top of the page in question and an administrator will delete it, or you can simply edit the page so that it meets Wikipedia's user page guideline. Thank you. XXN, 21:28, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm especially concerned about the first sentence on the page, which contains personal attacks. If you will not remove it (or rewrite it to meet Wikipedia's guidelines and policies) I or someone else will nominate the page for deletion. XXN, 21:32, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Norum. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
I see your last two edits were vandalism, which doesn't really fit your profile. Did you leave yourself logged in at some computer where others have had access to it? You might need to change your password too. Kerry (talk) 15:39, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Norum, you can be racist and right-wing in your own, personal life. Your userpage can even be a teeny bit polemical. However, your mainspace edits must be fair and neutral, and no POV-pushing at all is permitted.
Changing Emma from activist to actress is way over the line. Continue such edits and you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
Repeated violation claims? I've been here since 2005 and this is the first time this happened and you are calling it repeated? Two words, kangaroo court. Has it ever occured to you that maybe my account has been hacked? or perhaps that specific word doesn't exist in your dictionary? Norum06:58, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Norum: Since you just raised the possibility that your account has been hacked, that's enough for us to treat it as if it were (in fact we can't not).
Therefore, I will be shutting down the talk page per EF's request, making the block indefinite, and marking it as a compromised account. You are welcome to start a new account if you wish. Daniel Case (talk) 15:13, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Anna Frodesiak...right wing and racist? Sounds like discrimination by putting those two in the same paragraph Norum07:01, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ok, fine, it wasn't hacked, i was just getting a bit bored. Sorry for creating so much chaos. Not to mention I had a few too many drinks.
I feel that this admission is enough to warrant removal of talk page access and account creation capabilities. They are not here to help in any way, and seem to revel in chaos and irresponsibility.--Jorm (talk) 16:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't change the fact that this was a kangaroo court as I was blocked without being able to defend myself. Anan Frodesiak should be suspended as well for falsely accusing me of being a racist. That alone is discrimination. Even @Daniel Case should be banned for suspending me with prejudice. Norum17:11, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So I requested to be unbanned since my 72 hrs is up, yet you have failed to do so. In this case, I am going to appeal my case and I will win it, because I am the victim here. I will also try my best to get you block for ignoring my request and for abuse of power. This applies to Daniel Case and Anna Frodesiak. Norum04:20, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Since I actually did just revoke your talk page access (I must have forgotten to check the box a couple of days ago; sorry about that), you're going to find that rather difficult.
We do not accept your claim that your account was not hacked, because if it really was, well, you could be the hacker(s) telling us that, right? Best practices in computer networking security require us, like just about everyone else who uses computer networks, to take your claims of possibly being hacked seriously, and respond appropriately.
As for "having a few too many drinks", I would first read this, then (more importantly) this. Really, if you're going to drink and edit because you're "a bit bored", we're better off without you as a member of the community (We certainly wouldn't want you behind the wheel under those conditions, wouldn't we?).Competence is required, after all. Daniel Case (talk) 04:38, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I declined this user's appeal under another username, Frithewlf, and blocked that as the block here seems to be about more than just the compromised nature of this one. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
After seeing comments from my colleagues on the last UTRS appeal, I have elected to restore talk page access so that there may be a public discussion of this users' appeal. I have advised them to submit a request here, to be copied over to WP:AN for broader discussion. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:50, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Suggestions for unblock conditions-- Given the Hx of socking, we need a CU if we have not had one recently. I would be willing to unblock with the conditions of WP:1RR and blocking w/o further warning for any more "drunk" or "compromised" edits. Any further socking would likewise result in reinstatement of block. He would need to create a SHA committed identity to guard against account compromise. User has previously demonstrated the ability to edit constructively. Anything else, Y'all?-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 22:19, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I promise to play by the rules if unblocked. I admit, what I did last year wasn't the smartest thing I have ever done. And I am aware that the block was just. During my block here, I was editing and creating articled on polish wiki, mostly hockey related. On a side note, I was creating an article here (Waldemar Marszalek), but because of what happened, I was unable to finish it up and the article was deleted consequently.
I would love to be given a chance to rehabilitate myself. Norum00:18, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is entirely up to you, but I wouldn't go with this as the opening statement for the unblock discussion at AN. More specifics about why you belive you were blocked and what has changed since would be good, as well as some indication as to whether you would be willing to abide by topic bans that were previously proposed. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:31, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Where do I appeal then? I thought the fact that I was given a 6 months time frame was sufficient enough, but I will abide. Where do I appeal at this stage? Norum00:47, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The stanfdard offer is a non-binding framework for getting unblocked. The passage of time is not in and of itself sufficient. As I belive I explained in my reply to your UTRS appeal, what happens now is that you post your reason you belive you should be unblocked here, as this is the only page you can edit while still blocked. That appeal will be copied over for discussion at WP:AN. Any replies you have to comments made in that discussion may also be posted here, to be copied over to AN. If, at the end of that discussion there is a consensus that you be unblocked then you will be. Things you can do to help your chances:
Explain in your own words why you you were blocked and what would be different if you were allowed back
Be completely honest in all your remarks. Publicly stating the name of every other account you have used would be a great way to demonstrate this.
Indicate what editng restrictions you would be willing to abide by in order to facilitate your return.
In short, the real disccion of your unblocking hasn't even really started yet. You need to present your case here so I can copy it over for discussion. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:46, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I was blocked was because of my disruptive behavior. I changed info on Emma Gonzales to a crisis actress. I admit to what I did and I fully deserved the punishment I received. I wish I have never done this, but I am aware it is too late and nothing will change or justify my actions. This is something that I should have thought through, but I did not. I did not think of the consequences of my actions.
I have been a registered wikipedia user for some 14 years now. If I am to be reinstated, I will be playing by the rules and will not be involved in any more edit warring. I will comply with any restrictions placed on my account as a result of my actions. I would concentrate more on creating new articles rather than editing existing ones. I was actually in the midst of creating a new article titled Waldemar Marszalek, but I was unable to finish it, because of what happened. It was deleted subsequently. In the meantime, I have been creating and editing on polish Wikipedia, mostly articles related to North American hockey.
I admit that I shortly had another account here, Frithewlf. I created it for the sole purpose of trying to appeal my ban as at that time I was not sure how it all works. It wasn't until later when I was told the proper way of appealing bans. A few years ago I had another account, it also had Norum in it. I can't remember the exact user ID, but I think it was somewhere along the lines of Norum5000 or Norum86. I created that account a few years ago, but this was due to the fact that I had to clean up my laptop and I lost a lot of log ins, including Wikipedia. I was working on merging both accounts, but luckily I was able to retrieve my original log in information after a couple of weeks and my second account was not needed anymore. Kind regards, Norum20:40, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Norum, I believe we have had some pleasant or positive interaction in the past, though I don't remember where or when. I'd be willing to copy this request to WP:AN for discussion, but may I suggest that you first confirm that you'd be willing to accept the unblock conditions proposed here on 17 January by Dlohcierekim: I would be willing to unblock with the conditions of WP:1RR and blocking w/o further warning for any more "drunk" or "compromised" edits. Any further socking would likewise result in reinstatement of block. He would need to create a SHA committed identity to guard against account compromise? If you'd be comfortable with those restrictions and would like me to start a discussion at WP:AN, please say so here. I can't, of course, give any guarantee of the outcome. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:22, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Justlettersandnumbers. Thanks for your quick reply. If you are willing to copy my request to WP:AN for discussion then that would be great. Of course, I'd be willing to accept the mentioned unblock conditions. It makes sense considering what I did. I understand this is up for a discussion and that unlock is not guaranteed. Even if I won't get reinstated, it is still worth a try. Thank you in advance. Kind regards, Norum21:48, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I just saw the discussion and it does not look good for me. Seems my past actions are catching up with me. I understand, at least I gave it a try. How do I completely delete my account? Norum21:22, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, 78.26 thinks that my user name has a neo nazi reference. They should search wikipedia before making this kind of a claim. It comes from a musician John Norum. Norum21:32, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That party is widely recognized as neo-Nazi, and the main point of my post was not even about that, it was that "left-wing idiot" mess. Oh, and by the way, courtesy vanishing is a thing, but as "being in good standing" is a stipulation for that, there's a snowball's chance in hell you convince someone to do that to you. I do agree with you on one bit, though: it does not look good for me. Sorry for being abrasive, but it's fairly accurate. -A lad insane(Channel 2)22:43, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I admit my past actions were quite questionable at times, I was a different person then than I am now. I know this sounds rather cliche. As I said, my past actions here are hunting me now. I get that because of that I am in a tough situation. The issues I caused prior go back years ago. I was banned for the comments I made about Emma Gonzales, not something I posted a decade or so ago. And to clarify my Elvis comments. It was not meant to sound racist, but it does because of the choice of words. Perhaps it would sound better if I said African instead of black. The reason for this was because I came across rumours that he was biracial or at least in some percentage.I was going to look for actual links to it, but I never found anything. So those were just rumours afterall. I will accept whatever the final decision will be. Perhaps it is for the best to abandon my account. Norum22:54, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You're still dodging around the fact that you had the logo of the Nordic Resistance Movement on your user page for almost two years. I've read the article. Would you care to explain why you thought that the logo of a neo-Nazi (if "legalized") party was a suitable image for your user page? Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 23:50, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am not dodging it, I thought I already addressed that issue. I did not see it as a neo nazi symbol, just as a symbol of a political party. There was nothing more to it. Perhaps I should have been more careful with what I was uploading to my own profile. Let me just ask you this.... would this be any different had I uploaded communist symbols on my page? I don't want to get into a debate which side was worse as this would be pointless, but I see both sides as evil. Plus you see people walking around with tshirts with communist symbols on them. Or even those wearing tshirts depicting Che Guevara. Some say he was a great revolutionary, some say he was a communist mass killer. Hope that clarifies the issue. Norum00:53, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Suffusion of Yellow, if you want to mention in the forum what I write here, please write everything, not just what's convenient for you. And calling me a troll is just a hit below the belt. Norum01:55, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm officially done with wikipedia. I don't need some bigots (can't even recall their names from the debate, but we know who they are) invading my freedom of expression and calling me names.
I had honest intentions to redeem myself, but I don't like the way I'm being treated in that debate. I will not tolerate anyone treating me like shit. If Wikipedia doesn't want me, that is perfectly fine. I am done. Cheers. Norum15:54, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristian Niemann until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TheSandDoctorTalk04:04, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johan Niemann until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TheSandDoctorTalk04:09, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeanne Bowser until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Thank you for uploading File:Brew1.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, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Petter Karlsson until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name 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! --Butseriouslyfolks 04:15, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:New brent.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).
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to Puma Swede. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Do not move the article to her "official name" unless you can provide reliable sources to verify the notability of her name. Morbidthoughts (talk) 08:11, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.
wikimedia.org.
Please do not use talk pages such as Talk:Same-sex marriage for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. AV3000 (talk) 00:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Please refrain from using talk pages such as Talk:Black pride for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article; not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Incivility as well. Talk pages are not a place to sit your grievances and disparage other editors EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 16:34, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your user page at User:Norum may not meet Wikipedia's user page guideline. If you believe that your user page does not violate our guideline, please leave a note on this page. Alternatively you may add 
