User talk:Pmkpmk

Link spam

There's no quick, automatic way to tag and remove link spam. You must check this guy's contributions every once in a while and revert them if appropriate. You did well to leave a note in his talk page. There are a set of templates (see Template:TestTemplates) you can use to produce increasingly strong warnings. Check the resources at Wikipedia:Vandalism. I'll be watching this user's talk page for changes. If he continues to vandalize, he'll eventually get blocked. Don't worry; reverting such vandalism is easy. Thanks for caring! --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 10:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whisky

Thank you very much for your encouragement! You, too, have done excellent work on the whisky pages. Tell me, is Scotch popular in Germany? I seem to encounter more German Wikipedians than Scottish ones! CarolGray 20:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliments. For many years, Scotch was only popular as blend and was an "old men's drink" - or consumed by youngsters along with coke. Single Malt Whiskies are getting more popular for the last 20 years or so, with a significant gain in popularity for the last 10-5 years. Like many things, Germans tend to take things "serious" and do things "right". So a lot of people interested in Scotch and especially Single Malts do this almost overzealous and sometimes even pseudo-religiously. Tastings are celebrated, and people who tasted 3 different flavours so far think of themselves as connoisseurs. I have some friends on the British Isles (and one even happens to be the webmaster of a Highland distillery) and they all have a much more natural or occasional approach to drinking Whisky. Maybe it's comparable to the approach of Germans drinking beer. To all the Irish and British people I know, Whisky is just another liquor. Maybe a little bit of national pride, but not fanatism. In Germany, this seems to be the other way around. :-) --Pmkpmk 16:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad to see the full diversity of malts becoming more widely appreciated worldwide. CarolGray 14:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bundesland-level categories

Hello! I see you are listed in Category:Wikipedians in Germany. I have made subcategories for each Bundesland in case you would like to add yourself to the appropriate one. See Category:Wikipedians in Germany for a list of the subcategories (they use the English names, the same as their Wikipedia articles). --Angr (tɔk) 16:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poser 6 GUI Image

I'm wondering how you can release all rights to it, when it seems that you don't even own any rights to it. If you're a devoloper of Poser, I apologize, but you should probably change the license. PirateMonkey 23:45, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend the {{Windows-software-screenshot}} tag. PirateMonkey 03:49, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a screenshot of copyrighted computer software, and the copyright for its contents is most likely held by the author(s) or the company that created the software. It is believed that the use of a limited number of low-resolution screenshots:

for identification of, and critical commentary on, the software in question,
in the absence of a free alternative,
on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation,

…qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. See Wikipedia:Non-free content for more information. Fair use

To the uploader:

Please add a detailed non-free use rationale for each article the image is used in, which must also declare compliance with the other parts of the non-free content criteria, as well as the source of the work and copyright information.
For example non-free use rationales, see Wikipedia:Use rationale examples.
Try using Template:Non-free use rationale software screenshot to state the rationale.
If this is a screenshot of free software (GPL, BSD, etc.) do not use this template! Use the license tag that corresponds to the license instead, optionally alongside {{Free screenshot}} to categorize as a free screenshot.

To patrollers and administrators: If this image has an appropriate rationale please append |image has rationale=yes as a parameter to the license template.

Anne Will

Hi! I am responding to your post at Wikipedia:Requests for investigation. There's not too much we can do, as the person isn't persistant enough (about once every two weeks) to justify semiprotection. I have added the page to my watchlist, and maybe another admin or two can do the same.

Another thing that might be possible is to add an HTML comment to the page that is visible only to editors, not to readers. For an example, you can click the "edit" button on this message to see an example of what we could add. In your opinion, do you generally feel this would do more harm or good? E WS23 | (Leave me a message!) 03:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I give it a try. --Pmkpmk 07:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LubaShumeyko.jpg

Please change the license since the author did not release the picture to Public Domain (current license). You can find all possible licenses from Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags. Thanks. feydey 14:22, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which licencse would you suggest? --Pmkpmk 14:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A thank you and a question...

Thank you so much for the welcome note you placed on my talk page, although I'll admit it gave me a bit of a turn at first as I was convinced it was due to the fact that my first attempt at creating a Wikipedia page had faltered at the gate. I went back to check the entry and see now the error that I made, though am unsure how to correct it, perhaps you could give me a little advice, or tell me where to go to find it if you are not the right person for the job?

My source for the story in the piece that was tagged "citation needed" was the Seattle punk rock music scene of the late 1980's and early 1990's. This was the era of Nirvana, Soundgarden, Hole, L7, Sick and Wrong, and other Seattle second wave punk rock and grunge bands. The story was one that floated about at parties as a sort of cautionary tale for why one should never trust a record company employee. In other words, it was a typical punk rock musician's paranoiac rambling over authenticity and why you can't trust an outsider.

My question is: is the Seattle music scene's oral tradition based solely on the writer's memory a valid source in the wikipedia tradition? I suppose it depends on the context, as does anything. I'm looking forward to improving my wikipedia editing and participation skills! Thank you again for the warm welcome, and I'm looking forward to the scotch article. (Dalwhinnie is my current favorite, though Lagavulin and Oban I also like.) Strike71 16:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kate Moss

Thank you for your comments re my edits on the Kate Moss article. I actually am a regular contributor - I had forgotten to sign in. Best regards! Verne Equinox 03:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[[Category:Screenshots of Windows software]]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:DAZ Studio.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:DAZ Studio.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 01:23, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:C4d r10-2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:C4d r10-2.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 15:10, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:LubaShumeyko.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:LubaShumeyko.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD i3.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 12:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Massive.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Massive.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) 07:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Poser6ui.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Poser6ui.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. (ESkog)^(Talk) 15:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Wife acceptance factor for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wife acceptance factor is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wife acceptance factor 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.

RPI2026F1 (talk) 04:39, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]