User talk:Peytonio

Comments

HEy! Peyton Cline?

Suggestions

Complaints

Hey Peytonio, you deleted something about the "macula" in the "otolith" article, supposedly because the macula is only contained in the eye, not in the ear. Well, you're wrong! There is such a thing as the "saccular macula" and the "utricular macula", which are the sensory epithelia of the sacculus and utriculus, respectively. You shouldn't be editing an article unless you're more familiar with the topic!

Hey Payton Cline! It's Barrett Deming. Uh, why did you delete the "notable teachers" section that my friends and I worked so hard on? I'm happy to see you added some notable alumni, although they are only noted for football and not academics. However I'm very unhappy with the deletion of a fine section. Although it is debatable that the teachers in question were not notable, with time that would improve to the point where only the most notable of teachers/staff are listed. Keep in mind that students are only the "customers" of schools, the staff runs the business. Teachers are an important add.

I reverted the page because it is a direct violation to Wikipedia's standards.
- How? Crazykid777 22:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - It was the wording... and the information about Topich being really liberal and Cardona being a ninja were pointless for this site. They can certainly be on there, but you must include other teachers as well and must have their consent. --RPC (Peytonio) 23:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - I didn't put any of that, I just briefly stated that they were notable for what they brought to the school. I assume that was Ryan Graham, IDK, check history...Still, we need to add these teachers, and other students of notability in academic areas...Crazykid777 03:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - So Ryan supposedly did that... hmm... I'm not opposed to the addition of the teachers, but we don't need to put the no-cheating policy for Cardona... that is a given at any school... his is just the thing about cutting people up, and that's just for fun anyways. --RPC (Peytonio) 21:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removals

Please note that we already have an article on The Beatles' album 1 (1 (album)). In fact we have hundreds of articles on The Beatles, so if something is missing from the main article it usually means it's written elsewhere! Thanks. --kingboyk 01:04, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the info. --RPC (Peytonio) 19:08, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:(ONe).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:(ONe).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:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Crtenor01.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Crtenor01.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. --OrphanBot (talk) 02:06, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not about the truth, it's about "Who cares?"

Hi, I need no proof of your or Sam Hazo's attendance at the Arkansas All-State conference because I'm an Arkansas music major and am fully aware that he was there. It doesn't belong in the article because it violates WP:NOTE — it's completely non-notable. If we listed every conference Sam Hazo has been a clinician at (along with irrelevant tangential details about those conferences like how many bands were there) his entry would be three megabytes long. And if being a clinician somewhere warrants a mention on Wikipedia, God bless the maintainers of Fred Fennell's page, or Alfred Reed's, or any other big band person.

If something majorly significant to the outside world happened at All-State, then by all means include it. But make sure it passes the test at WP:NOTE first. SFT | Talk 03:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. — Sorry about your user page, I wasn't paying attention.

P.P.S. — New comments on User talk pages should go at the bottom, not the top; you can use the little + button at the top to do this automatically. SFT | Talk 03:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:American Standard Back.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:American Standard Back.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:American Standard Front.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:American Standard Front.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:American Standard Back.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:American Standard Back.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Pais (talk) 10:49, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The American Standard

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

No indication of meeting the notability guidelines at Wikipedia:Notability (books).

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pais (talk) 14:01, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (File:American Standard Front.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:American Standard Front.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Pais (talk) 10:39, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Updating the box office gross

Hello, Peytonio. When you update the box office gross in the infobox of a film article, as you have done for the Avatar (2009 film) article, also make sure to update the box office gross information in the Box office section. Flyer22 (talk) 22:17, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]