User talk:Quadell/Archive 39

Archive 35

←

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39

Archive 40

Archive 41

→

Archive 45

Roman Catholic Church

wondering what you think about my edits being deleted regarding the infobox on this page. I have added several reliable third party references but my efforts are deleted by people including an admin who does not provide any reference. I would like to bring this to FA but I need someone in the higher upness to help. I contacted you because you congratulated me on my efforts to make Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Miami an FA. Thanks. NancyHeise (talk) 02:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to pop in. Presumably, I am that admin mentioned (and hello to you Quadell, long time no see). My main gripe now is that 5 users have shown some degree of concern for NancyHeise's edits. And instead of waiting for discussion, NancyHeise has tried to start edit wars. With patience on all sides, I'm sure we can work something out. But new controversial content shouldn't get to sit in article while it is under talk page discussion. Only after there is a consensus should the material be re-instated.-Andrew c ^[talk] 04:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for calling me an edit warrior. The history of the page shows that I reverted one edit to subsequently add several more references to the disputed section. No reference was given by this admin who removed my sourced material. NancyHeise (talk) 04:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Since you are not an edit warrior, if I remove the disputed material while we are discussing it on the talk page, will you promise not to revert me while the discussion is ongoing (say at least 24 hours, if not more, pending the outcome of the discussion)?-Andrew c ^[talk] 04:58, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Before removing properly sourced material which is sometimes called "vandalism". Do you think you could list your validly referenced reasons for doing so? So far in this discussion, there is no editor who has contributed one valid reference as justification to remove this material. Removing it goes against Wikipedia policies and is not in keeping with the form of other GA's and FA's NancyHeise (talk) 05:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

help! my reliably sourced edit was removed with no explanation and no references provided by this unreasonable admin guarding the page. NancyHeise (talk) 06:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm currently trying to avoid drama, as mentioned at the top of this page. All I'll say is, if an infobox designation (such as "founder") is disputed by reliable sources, the infobox should say "disputed", with further details in a footnote or in the main article text giving reliably-sourced opinions about who the true founder was. I know some reliable sources consider Saint Paul the founder of the Roman Catholic Church; others, Constantine. The contention that Jesus was the founder should not be ignored, but it should not be in the inbox either. And that's all I have to say about that. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

StorNext File System

Since you were the admin who deleted the article, I wanted to alert you that I restored the article and reverted to the revision that did not contain the copyrighted text. I hope that's okay with you. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

No problems. Thanks for improving the article! – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 00:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

More copyright fun!

Hi there, I have come across a couple of super fun image copyright issues, I'm hoping you can shed some light on them. They are here (specifically Image:Worship-leader.jpg and Image:Barnstarpinstripes.png, although Image:Eichmann.jpg is an interesting one too, especially this discussion). Too much drama for you? just say so and I'll bug someone else :-)--DO11.10 (talk) 00:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, just for you. ;-) – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 00:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll take care of 'em. --DO11.10 (talk) 02:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Wishing you a productive break

I feel your frustration. The politics of Wikipedia, as some inforce them, have a way of letting the steam out of the engine. May your break be a time to refuel and regroup. Thanks for all of your efforts. Your "favorite" bot master has labeled me a troll, but then his favorite policy appears to be WP:IAR which he does make extensive use of. I will never understand how the rapid deletion of images that are being used correctly, due to easy to fix technical issues, does anything to improve or maintain Wikipedia. Well, a bit of steam venting myself. Thanks again for your efforts. Dbiel ^(Talk) 03:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Non-free image of Royal children

Previously, you have been involved in a discussion about non-free images of Royal children. Therefore I would like to notify you of the deletion nomination of Image:Princechristianbday_2006.jpg. – Ilse@ 10:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

VAwebteam's image uploads

I tagged Image:Copper snuffbox.jpg as being a PUI, which you deleted last September. I recall coming across discussion that you had similarly tagged other images uploaded by this editor as being replaceable fair use. There's currently discussion going on at the image's deletion nom re. obtaining permission being granted by the Victoria & Albert Museum for certain images being uploaded here from their website with permission, and I'd appreciate your input on it if you have the time. Thanks. --BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 16:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Image Question

Firstly, Q, Good Luck. I hope you're doing well in the WikiDramFree-mode. I was happy to see the WWTT page deleted (the only other good option would have been a total rewrite by others). I hope that helped your stress/drama-tolerance level come down some.

I had an image question and I know that you really are the guru on images, even if I sometimes think you may be a tad extreme (but probably for the best anyway). I have seen many images that stated on their fair-use or free-use rationale (or whatever) "from flickr". Is any image posted to flickr.com considered free or acceptable for Wikipedia? I am looking in particular at this image of a painting by actress/artist Ariana Richards. Her WikiPage is sparse, there is no fair/free image of her, and I would like to perhaps include an image of her work, if so can be done "legally".

I would appreciate any comments, recommendations, or suggestions you may have.

VigilancePrime (talk) 05:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Hope you get to feeling better and/or whatever's going on IRL works out for the best real soon.

Hey, thanks for the well-wishes. I'm doing better -- cutting out the Wikidrama has helped a lot!

Unfortunately we can't use just any photo from Flickr. It depends on the license the person chooses when uploading to Flickr. For instance, this one says "© All rights reserved" in the "additional information" section, so we can't use it. And this one says "Some rights reserved", which is a good sign, but then it shows the icon, which means "non-commercial only", so we can't use it. But this one says "some rights reserved" and only shows the icon, so it's fine to use. It's confusing, and all the more so because all Flickr photos say "This photo is public", but that does not mean that the photo is free.

So in summary, if a Flickr photo says "© All rights reserved", we can't use it. If it says "Some rights reserved", but shows the or icons, we can't use it. But if it says "Some rights reserved" and only shows and/or , then it's fine.

If you go to Flicr's advanced search, you can check "Only search within Creative Commons-licensed photos", and then check the two checkboxes below it, and it will only show you images that Wikipedia accepts. You can also use FIST, the Free Image Search Tool, to look for free images, but it seems to be down at the moment.

All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Actress's Headshot

Hi, I see you deleted an actress's headshot on 12/10/2007. I am sure you had good reason, copyright-wise, and rest assured that this is a completely drama-free request from me. I have been trying to explain to this actress about Wikipedia's copyright requirements. In response, she has requested that I put her deleted headshot back up. She forwarded me an e-mail with this verbiage from the photographer who took the photograph, "To whom it may concern at wikipedia: I am [photographer's name] and I took this photo of [the actress]. I give her the right to put my photos of her on her wikipedia page. Sincerely,[the photographer]"

Is that enough to allow me to put the photo back up on Wikipedia? If not, what should I try to get those who own the rights to say? Is there any specific boiler-plate release they could use? Many thanks. Fbagatelleblack (talk) 03:49, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

As you probably suspect, that photographer's statement is not enough. But as it happens, there are some help pages on Wikipedia for the very problem you've encountered. The nuts and bolts are at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission, and some sample letters are at Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. If you find you like requesting image permission from famous people, and you want to do more of it, there is a mighty fine how-to manual at User:Videmus Omnia/Requesting free content. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 05:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow! Good links! Thanks very much. Fbagatelleblack (talk) 17:23, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Quadell-User:jaytur1

Can you make my page like yours please? Like the headers and that stuff, plus I have a menu. Tahnk you. --Jay^Tur₁ (Contribs) 12:37, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Polbot and Taxoboes

Hi,

Just to let you know that the "name" and "colour" parameters are no longer required in taxoboxes with an appropriately linked kingdom. I think a bot is being prepared to remove the colour parameters (so the colours can be easily modified), so it would be particularly helpful if Polbot could be modified not to specify them.

Thank you !

Verisimilus T 14:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Losar

Quadell, Losar is currenting happening, how may I ensure that it is flagged as a current event? Is there a News Wiki article that this Wikipedia article can interwiki? How may I progress this? Is there anything else you recommend?
Blessings in the mindstream
B9 hummingbird hovering ^{(talk • contribs)} 06:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Discussion about fair use of Queen image on Canada article

Hello Quadell, there is a discussion happening at Talk:Canada#Image_of_the_Queen regarding the use of Image:Queen_of_canada_wob.jpg under fair use. I thought since you are active in the fair use policy on Wikipedia that you could add your 2c to it. Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 22:03, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to hear the news

Hi Quadell. I noticed you changed your wikibreak notice a few days ago. I had noticed you weren't around as much. Hope all is well and that you return to more extensive editing when you feel ready. Carcharoth (talk) 13:35, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, dude. I appreciate it. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 00:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CSIS logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:CSIS logo.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) 04:02, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Al harbi and bin laden.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Al harbi and bin laden.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) 18:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Featured sound promoted

Congratulation a sound file you up-loaded and nominated has been promoted to featured sound. Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Marcus Garvey, speech, 1921.ogg Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 23:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Yay! – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 00:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations. You seem to be as productive here as you are at Wikisource! Cowardly Lion (talk) 00:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh no. I used to be, but WS is my home nowadays. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 00:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Would I be right in thinking there's less controversy and aggression there? When I browse through talk pages or Admin noticeboards here, I sometimes find a remarkably different tone and atmosphere from the Wikisource one? (Edit warring seems to be almost unheard of there.) Though it's nice to see that some of the best Wikisource editors are here as well! Cowardly Lion (talk) 00:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

No content in Category:Images to be moved to the Commons

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Images to be moved to the Commons, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Images to be moved to the Commons has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Images to be moved to the Commons, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 03:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Core topics - 1,000/with problems could need some mainenance

Such a generated page could help people who would like to help where it's needed most, but you surely know that it's most likely very far outdated by now. You might want to publish the script or offer to give it to someone to maintain the script and the generated page ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.74.56.20 (talk) 17:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Brian Mulroney

An editor has nominated Brian Mulroney, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "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 by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Mulroney (2nd nomination) and 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. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The History of King Lear

Hi, Quadell, when you were adding The Two Noble Kinsmen to Wikisource, you made a table. I've finished adding Tate's History of King Lear to Wikisource, and have now started on The History of King Lear here at Wikipedia. I'd like to provide a synopsis of the play in the two versions, in a table that has two columns, so that the story of Tate's disgustingly sentimental(!) adaptation can be seen side-by-side with Shakespeare's original tragedy. I haven't started writing the synopsis yet, but when I do, would you be able to put it into a two-column box for me? Thanks. Cowardly Lion (talk) 13:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, it's really fascinating to learn about how works have been bowdlerized throughout history. Sure, I can help format things into a table whenever you're ready. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 19:06, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I've now finished that section so it's ready for your kind services. I'll be working on other sections, so there shouldn't be an edit conflict. I'm not sure how happy I am with it at the moment. It may be too long to grab people's attention. It wasn't possible to have a side-by-side comparison of each section of the play, because Tate has a different number of scenes, and while he omits some sections and adds others, they're not necessarily in the same order as they are in Shakespeare's version. But if you could add the table for me, I can make more modifications later. Thanks. You're great. Cowardly Lion (talk) 12:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I've just discovered that button at the second from the right in the edit box. I had seen it before, but had never hovered the mouse over it or wondered what it was for. Okay, I've managed to add a table myself, with several uses of preview. I don't much like that the right column is much wider than the left one, or that in some cells, the text doesn't begin at the top, but I don't know if that can be changed. If you see any room for improvements in format or content, please don't hesitate to jump in. Cowardly Lion (talk) 14:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this what you're looking for? – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 16:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

That's perfect. I don't know how you know all these things! Cowardly Lion (talk) 16:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I asked at the Shakespeare WikiProject to have the article assessed, and two people said they didn't like that section - that there had to be a better way of comparing the two versions. I think it would have been great if there had been less text, but as it was, the table just made the text less attractive to read, and made it difficult (for me, at least) to add images to that section. So I removed the table, and hope you don't feel I've wasted your time. See the difference between this and the current version. That section is still the least good part of the article, I think, but I'm still working on it.

There's something else that you may be able to help with. If not, don't worry. In the critical reception section, I put some images on the right and some on the left. When I use <blockquote>, the text is automatically indented. To the right of the image of Charles Lamb, I have a blockquote section from "is too hard and stony" to "was left but to die", and I also have a three-line quotation (which I tried to indent by using colons) from Shakespeare's Lear from "Vex not his ghost" to "Stretch him out longer." However, because of Lamb's photo on the left, the indenting doesn't seem to work, and the quotations start exactly underneath the regular text. Can anything be done about that? If not, please don't worry. You've been very helpful already. Cheers. Cowardly Lion (talk) 23:16, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

P.S. It seems to have been accepted for the DYK section of the Main Page, so I'm hoping it will appear there tonight! Cowardly Lion (talk) 23:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you can ignore the above. Another editor has moved the images, so that they're on the right. I actually would have preferred some right, some left, but I agree that it's not good to have them facing away from the text. This is what I was referring to when I previously posted here. Thanks. Cowardly Lion (talk) 11:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Another reincarnation of Fox53/Kay Körner?

Hello Quadell,

sorry to bother you, but I recently stumbled over the Sportvereinigung (SV) Dynamo article and upon reading it found, that it didn't met wikipedias quality standards in language and, especially, neutrality. I tagged the article and left an explanation for my action on the talk page under "This article needs a cleanup!". The reply I received from the main contributor, anonymus user 194.95.142.179, the fact that I was accused of vandalism for it, and the fact that the tag was just deleted without truly anserwing or addressing the questions I raised make me think, the editor is just another sockpuppet of Kay Körner/Fox53 or whatever other id's he has used in the past. He is barred from both the German and English version of the wikipedia and I noticed you took care of the matter last time. I won't press the matter further with him as he is extremly intolerant and I can think of better things to do on wiki then trade juvenile insults with him! Drop me a line if you think there is anything else I can do, have fun,EA210269 (talk) 23:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

PS:Just read the bit about avoiding conflict at the top, ups, I appologize, ignore it (me)!EA210269 (talk) 23:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Maxbeerbohm2.jpeg

Could you please undelete this? The Commons version is PD-US only which means it will soon be deleted. -Nard 01:02, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Budwik 1 sm.PNG

please undelete this image. i agree to realease all rights, reluctantly. Roobydo (talk) 00:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Male_chest.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Male_chest.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -Nard 16:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Seal Phuket.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Seal Phuket.png. 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) 12:20, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hambali.jpg

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator 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. Stifle (talk) 18:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Categorization of Commons:Image:Froita Mazá 006.jpg

A while back you edited Commons:Image:Froita Mazá 006.jpg to place it in Commons:Category:Malus sieversii. The only thing I see identifying it is that it's from Galicia, which is not part of the natural range of Malus sieversii. I believe this actually belongs in Commons:Category:Malus domestica but I figured I should check if you know something about the image that I don't. —dgies^t_c 23:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikibreak

Your call is important to us. Please hold, and an operator will be with you shortly. For faster service, or any service at all, consider using the e-mail link to your left. Thanks, and remember: it's the most important encyclopedia ever. . . but it's still just an encyclopedia. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 02:45, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:AFL-CIO.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:AFL-CIO.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Electrons?

Your bot autogenerated some bird articles, specifically the keel-billed motmot, and put it into the category "electrons" due to the presence of that word in its binomial name; obviously birds arent base atomic particles! just thought i'd bring this to your attention; is there any kind of exception rule you could stick into the code? thanks! Ironholds (talk) 23:54, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

NFCC 8 revisited

You were involved in this discussion last year, so I thought you might be interested in Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#Criterion 8 objection. howcheng {chat} 20:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:GreyTriggerfish.JPG

Please fix the source information at Commons. In the future, please refrain from deleting images which have incomplete information at Commons. The mere fact that it exists there is insufficient; verify source license and permission as required before deleting the local copy. – Mike.lifeguard | ^@en.wb 02:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Gene Roddenberry.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Gene Roddenberry.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) 12:04, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:CSIS logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:CSIS logo.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) 12:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Abuzubaydah.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Abuzubaydah.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ahmed Ressam.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ahmed Ressam.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:24, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Polbot date ranges

I noticed that Polbot uses dashes in date ranges but they should really be endashes according to the MoS. So instead of dates of birth and death like (January 14, 1932 - September 30, 1999) it should be (January 14, 1932 – September 30, 1999). The endash can be be the HTML control code or the character but I think the control code is better. Jason Quinn (talk) 22:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Howard Frank archives

You may be interested in knowing that other admins don't give a shit about the fact you closed these images as keep, to the extent they didn't even consult you before deleting them. The Evil Spartan (talk) 22:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Surname disambiguations

Sorry to hear you are on indefinite wikibreak. Thought you might be interested in this, an attempt to restart something you did previously. If others get interested again, are you around enough to pass over any code or explain how you generated the pages for that project? Carcharoth (talk) 10:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Rising Star

A tag has been placed on Rising Star, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 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. E Wing (talk) 16:03, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Commons copy

Hello, Quadell. Can you find or point me to the copy of this photo in the commons? I will be happy to link it to John Vachon (where I found the red link). —SusanLesch (talk) 08:33, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Try commons:Image:Negro boy near Cincinnati, Ohio (LOC).jpg. Lupo 09:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much. —SusanLesch (talk) 07:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair use review

Hi, I noticed you are interested in reviewing the fair use of images. I happened across the article List of KO One characters - to me it looks like there are substantial violations of WP:FU. Was interested in your opinion and suggestion as to what should be done about it? Regards, TwoMightyGods^Persuasion_Necessity 17:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, TwoMightyGods - Quadell seems to not be very active at Wikipedia at the moment. You might want to pose your question at WP:MCQ for a faster response. Kelly ^hi! 17:46, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi. As Kelly mentioned, I'm only on Wikipedia sporadically now. The use (or overuse) of non-free images in lists has been a matter of fierce debate in the past. There was even an ArbCom case about it, as I recall. I believe the page you mention violates WP:NFCC#3, although I'm sure there are some who will disagree. Yes, it would be best to ask for consensus on Wikipedia:Fair use review or Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, or even Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 14:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Are you back?

Hi Quadell. I noticed your recent activity. Are you back? Don't want to throw you in the deep end straightaway, but I thought you might be interested in this, since you were involved with Wikipedia:Suggestions for name disambiguation before. If you want to ease your way back in and avoid big projects like that, fair enough, but if you are back it's great to see you back! :-) Carcharoth (talk) 15:20, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I am indeed back. I'm taking it slow, but I'll give it a look-see. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 15:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back! Garion96 (talk) 15:36, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Looking it over, I don't think there's consensus to have a "Jones" article with a list of everyone whose last name is Jones. I'm willing to help with disambiguating "Tom Jones", but not "Jones". – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 16:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Templating the regulars

Quadell, please don't plaster templates all over my page. I get the message, you want to delete the images. Have at it. Leave my talk page alone. Thanks. Dekkappai (talk) 17:03, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to avoid it. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 17:04, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Quadell

I'd just like to say thanks for answering my call for a Peer Review of the article, Prehistoric medicine; I was really in need of some more feedback on how to improve the article. Some of the unreferenced statements you mention in your review were covered by some of my earlier references, which have subsequently been lost, removed or forgotten by myself!

Although there have been so many additions and changes to the article over the past few months, it doesn't feel like it's actually going anywhere or towards anything; is it still a Start-class in all related portals? I've requested that it be reassessed by it isn't recieving much feedback, to put it mildly.. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 20:40, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Non-free currency-EU

Template:Non-free currency-EU has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. BJ^Talk 16:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Your help please...

I uploaded Image:USCG WPB 87301 Barracuda - at speed.jpg a long time ago. It has since been copied to the commons, and the original copy deleted. I am pretty sure I included the URL where I got it from when I first uploaded it.

Maybe I am not remembering correctly. It was before there were any templates to assist in uploading.

Could you either check the image's history, or temporarily userify it for me to check?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 17:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Greetings. I'm afraid that you didn't give the source when you uploaded it. The text you included (on Wikipedia) was the following:

WPB 87301 Barracuda - at speed
*Note the ramp at the stern for the [[USCG Short Range Prosecutor|Short Range Prosecutor]] boarding party launch.
*The fifty caliber machine guns mount on pintles, port and starboard, just forward of the red stripe.
*The black smudge in the hull abaft the superstructure is the exhause of the port engine.
{{PD-USGov-DHS-CG}}

I couldn't find it using a Google Image search either. This looks like it would make a good replacements, though. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 18:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Just an FYI...

I know that it's now a previous function, but Polbot's creation of missing fauna pages turned up a problem; it categorised rodents in the subgenus Terricola under Terricola; not something to do with rodents at all! Dont know if me telling you is at all helpful, but I thought you might like to know for future runs. Ironholds 18:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, that's very helpful. I'll fix it with a bot. If you find any other category mishaps, or errors where the link to the "genus" or "family" is to something unrelated, please let me know and I'll take care of it. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 18:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll do so :). It should only have affected the microtus genus of rodents, so I believe i've already fixed all of them. Ironholds 18:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I ran into another case where it classified certain birds as electrons rather than pointing them to Electron (bird). :-) Apparently the bot made this sort of error often. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 19:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and it redirected Microtus majori to European Pine Vole. Although studies have shown a link between the species they only served to emphasise the differences. I've corrected it, i'll be checking through the Microtus genus for any more iffy bits. Ironholds 19:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Wait, you're active?

Get back on Wikisource, ya bum. Or I'll make you re-do all the hijackers' biographies with me ;) Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 19:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I saw that Flight 11 made it to Featured! Good times, man. I'm afraid I've defected from Wikisource to Distributed Proofreaders. Ah well. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 19:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Well done Quadell

On 27 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Price Hill, Cincinnati, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Victuallers (talk) 22:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)