Jump to content

User talk:TomStar81/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Archive 5←Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13→Archive 15

Draža Mihailović

Hello TomStar81, I am sorry to bother you, but since you had intervened in an edit war situation between another user and myself in that page, and since you are an admin, I couldn´t refrain to expose to you a situation that I found myself in.

This is a short resume of what happend:

  • 1) - User:DIREKTOR and myself edit-warred on the article.
  • 2) - You rightfully intervened and blocked us both: (Feb 18)
  • 3) - You also protected the page and left a advice that we start edit "civilly": User_talk:FkpCascais#Blocked and User_talk:DIREKTOR/Archive_8#Blocked.
  • 4) - The article was unblocked one month after you had blocked it: (March 18)
  • 5) - In the meanwile I had exposed from the beggining in detail all my edits and its reasons on the talk page whare I continued the discussion, finding complete abscence from the debate of User:DIREKTOR (his last intervention on the talk page was prior to your block of us).
  • 6) - I refrained from editing the article and patiently waited the response from Direktor, so a compromise could be reached.
  • 7) - Some other users edited the page.
  • 8) - User:DIREKTOR completely skips your advice, ignores the discussion, and reverts all other editors putting back the same version he insisted on the edit-war you have blocked him for (March 25).
  • 9) - I reverted him, and pointed him that we should reach a consensus first.
  • 11) - He also unnecessarily provokes me in a completely different article talk page: [1]
  • 12) - He reports me, exagerates, and without me knowing, I get blocked for a week!: [2]

I would really like to have your opinion on this. I was correct, discussed all my edits exaustedly on the talk page, refrained from editing the article, and when the other user (Direktor), after ignoring completely the discussion, makes the same revert we were edit-warring about, and I revert him pointing to the talk page, I get blocked for one week. It is hard to me to understand the situation, since it was pointed to me by the admins that I got blocked primarily for reverting the EE related articles. I think that they didn´t knew about the background of the story, and I get too quikly and too harshly punished. Am I wrong?

I am really sorry to bother you with this, and I will understand if you don´t have time to deal with this but, I would just like to have some advice for my procedure. Thank you. :) FkpCascais (talk) 04:37, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

"When block ends" (?) it ended long time now, how would I write to you then here?, "Banned" (for discussing on talk page?), "dishonorably discharged from the site" (?). Thank you very much for your kind words, and for your time and advice. FkpCascais (talk) 16:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Newsletter

Have you poked Cbrown yet? If not, I'll shoot him an email tonight or tomorrow. :-) —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 21:43, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 April 2010

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)

The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

1966 Soviet submarine global circumnavigation

TomStar81: When i created 1966 Soviet submarine global circumnavigation, I posted it for consideration at TDYK on March 26th. First, on April 5th, Calmer Waters claims that my "hook" is not in the article, which is ridiculous but I went ahead and changed it. Then, starting on April 6th, Materialscientist have been repeatedly challenged me regarding the reliability and accuracy of this article. Every time I think have addressed the issues that he raised, he comes up with another objection. This is becoming increasingly tedious and irritating. I do not what to escalate this near-flameout situation, but I want this resolved. Marcd30319 (talk) 01:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

TomStar81, ed17 is on the case. Thanks for your response. Marcd30319 (talk) 12:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Admin?

Hi, first I want to thank you for considering me. I thought about this for two days no, however, right now I feel that I first want to understand better and become a contributing coordinator. Maybe in a few months or so when I have a better understanding I will reconsider. Thanks for asking. MisterBee1966 (talk) 04:31, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

oops

I think you forgot the actual text inside the award: [3] -MBK004 06:06, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

War of the Bavarian Succession

I've responded to your comments. Auntieruth55 (talk) 23:09, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, I've probably got this on the brain. It is at FAC now. But I meant Order of Saint Hubert (Bavarian) Auntieruth55 (talk) 23:31, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

A question regarding a tool I am working on

Good day to you. I hope all is well where you are. I am working on making a little tool to hopefully make it easier for inexperienced editors to create biographical articles. Right now I am concentrating on military people because that is what I am most familiar with but if it works out I will expand it. I was wondering if you had any comments or suggestions about this. I understand of course that this is not a perfect solution and not without its own problems but I am trying to make it as easy as possible (given the sytem limitations in place and my own limited knowledge of wikicode). Here is a link to what I have made so far Military biography creator. I am trying to figure out a way to allow the user to input data in the front end before the article is created. For example this first screen would essentially ask for the name of the article then the next would ask a series of questions like When were they born, where where they born, etc so that when they get to the article it will have some basic info already. Again, please let me know what you think positive or negative. --Kumioko (talk) 15:19, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, you had a lot of good ideas that I will work on. I also think I am goig to change the format to be more in line with Wikipedia:Article Wizard which I just found in the last couple days. I also put in a request to User:Eloquence in Wikicommons to allow the use of multiple input boxes so hopefully that will pan out eventually (not expecting that one overnigth). That will allow me to preload the questions and data for a basic article. Thats also why I limited the sections, I don't expect a new user is going to create a GA+ article out of the gate so I was just giving enough structure to maybe be a B class. I am going to try and incorporate a lot of your comments though. --Kumioko (talk) 11:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 April 2010

University course: help is definitely needed.

A while back, you offered to help, and we are now at the point where we need it. If you go here, to section 7 you can see the list of articles they've edited. Some are up for GA already, but most of them could really use some help on the wikification, etc, comments, reviews, and general encouragement. There have been a few instances of them stepping on the toes of people with vested interests (ownership issues), but generally they are finding wikipedians cooperative and helpful. Auntieruth55 (talk) 01:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, TomStar81. You have new messages at Auntieruth55's talk page.
Message added 17:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ACR for War of Bavarian Succession. I was able to figure out approximate conversions on currency. 

 Auntieruth55 (talk) 17:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks a lot for your strong and thoughtful post at WP:AN Tom. I really appreciate it. Nick-D (talk) 09:51, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi

i replied. Blablaaa (talk) 20:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Kongos

Hello Tom, I have dealt with your issues at the ACR for the Kongo battlecruisers. Cam (Chat) 22:52, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 April 2010

Help please!

Hello, I am working on World War II Radio Heroes: Letters of Compassion for a class project for my professor user:Auntieruth55. If you could provide me with feedback, advice, or a review that would be great. Thank you. Wexlax20 (talk) 13:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Straw Poll

Will this straw poll on preemptive disambiguation be the final word? Rin tin tin (talk) 01:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Can I cite WP:NOTVOTE? Rin tin tin (talk) 05:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 April 2010

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Review of closure process 2

Because you've contributed to FPC either recently or in the past, I'm letting you know about the above poll on the basis of which we may develop proposals to change our procedures and criteria. Regards, Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 23:36, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much

for the barnstar; very kind of you, and much appreciated! I haven't written anything up for the newsletter yet, but I should get the time to stick something in there later today. EyeSerenetalk 07:31, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Written something up - feel free to edit as necessary :) EyeSerenetalk 09:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit notices

FYI: It might be easier to add edit notices to articles rather than hidden notes. They're a relatively new feature. More info at Wikipedia:Editnotice. Cheers.--Chaser (talk) 16:42, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)

The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Iowa class battleship library book.

As you seem to have missed the post on WT:OMT, I'm gonna ask you how that book hunt is going. As, in your time, it's 5:57 PM, on Friday, you are either 5 days late or have forgotten to tell WT:OMT that it's checked out. If you have it, than, please fix the ref prob. It's breaking up the text. Buggie111 (talk) 23:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Iowa FA troubles

Since you are working on referencing the main class article on the Iowas, you might want to devote some effort on Armament of the Iowa class battleship since judging from this, the article might be future FAR bait... -MBK004 07:22, 8 May 2010 (UTC)


Images

there are too many images, and we already have motoko kusanagi in her khaki uniform. the image is unnecessary, and there already is a policy on having too many images>Bread Ninja (talk) 19:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

sorry about not notifying you, but anyways heres the guideline WP:NFCC#3 and #8Bread Ninja (talk) 21:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 10 May 2010

where?

So where does your salvage go, for the article that sucks? Thanks. Wittlessgenstein (talk) 22:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to know. Wittlessgenstein (talk) 08:00, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. So the official sequence goes - slag off the article, agree to salvage and delete, just delete, copy back the references if anyone asks. Great. Wittlessgenstein (talk) 10:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

5"/38 source

[4], use the area code 87111 —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 20:29, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

GRD

1. Avoid heartburn-triggering foods. These vary from person to person, but common offenders include orange juice, chocolate, tomato sauce, spicy foods, mint, garlic, and vinegar. Fatty, greasy foods, like cheeseburgers and fries, are also heartburn instigators.

2. Stay upright for a few hours after you eat. Sitting up works with gravity to keep food and stomach acid from flowing up into your esophagus. Better yet, move about a bit to help speed digestion. "Our grandparents had it right when they headed out for a walk after a large meal," he says.

3. But abstain from exercise right after eating. Intense workouts slow digestion, making reflux more likely. Better to exercise first thing in the morning or a few hours after a meal. If you still experience heartburn symptoms after a workout, drink extra water. Staying hydrated helps improve digestion to keep symptoms at bay.

4. Eat smaller meals. To avoid heartburn, aim to eat up to six mini-meals a day, as opposed to three large ones. The worst? Eating a large meal right before bed. Try to abstain from food or drinks within an hour or two of bedtime. Even a tall glass of water before lying down can trigger symptoms in susceptible individuals.

5. Go easy on caffeine and alcohol-and avoid cigarettes. All three can relax the esophageal sphincter muscle, which normally keeps stomach acid from splashing up into the esophagus. Carbonated beverages can also cause this problem.

6. Don't eat too quickly. Try chewing slowly and putting your fork down between bites. Hot soups are a good appetizer because they take longer to consume.

7. Wear looser-fitting clothes. Tight belts, waistbands, and pantyhose constrict the stomach, sometimes triggering reflux.

8. Find ways to relax. Stress may increase stomach acids, raising the likelihood of heartburn.

9. Aim to lose a few extra pounds. The pressure of excess weight-especially around the abdomen-increases the chance that stomach acid will backwash into the esophagus.

10. Try chewing gum. This can boost the production of saliva, which neutralizes stomach acid.

11. Bend with your knees. Bending over at the waist tends to promote heartburn symptoms.

12. Elevate the head of your bed. Place blocks or bricks under your bedposts to raise the head of your bed 6 inches. Elevating your head and chest during sleep helps prevent nighttime reflux. A wedge pillow may also work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.108.241.23 (talk) 21:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Big Tray Class Land Battleship (Gundam).jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Big Tray Class Land Battleship (Gundam).jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file 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 file 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 '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 uploaded, 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) 13:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Standardization of ranges in the missile section

Was this what you wanted? It's all I could see that needed standardization. Buggie111 (talk) 01:59, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Who's gonna do the honors of noming it for a GA? Buggie111 (talk) 02:31, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
ME!!! But seriously, I would like that honor, if there are no objections. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:44, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm fine with that. You were the one who raised her in her first glory days, so yo ucan rev her up again. Buggie111 (talk) 02:48, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Also, shouldn't you state somthing about Illinois once being a Montana, then being switched? I don't really know how to word it. Buggie111 (talk) 03:22, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll cover the more technical details like that before the ACR; right now, the priority is to get the article to GA. For that we don't need a buttload of info, we just need to satisfy the B-class criteria. Once we clear GA though things are going to get interesting. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:24, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Tom, that isn't a "more technical detail," that's an integral detail that needs to be covered before GA. Don't be so focused on retaining your FT that you use shortcuts etc. to get this through GAN. —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 09:18, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Kentucky was planned to have guided missiles on her, am I right? That should be mentioned. Buggie111 (talk) 13:43, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Tom, Was just wondering if for your operation Normandy work, have you refered to the following books: Victory in Europe( I dont know the publisher, but there were a series of books, the first being Blitzkrieg), also the Reader's Digest companion to WWII. thanks, RanjandKrishnan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranjandkrishnan (talk • contribs) 07:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 2010

Replaceable fair use File:DD(X) Advanced Gun System.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:DD(X) Advanced Gun System.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Marcus Aurelius (talk) 18:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Is the image I uploaded on commons under the same name equivalent enough? I'm sure other free images can be found as well. At the very least it fails as a fair use on Zumwalt class destroyer.Marcus Aurelius (talk) 13:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 24 May 2010

Question

Hey Tom, just a quick question. Seeing as though you are the lead coordinator on the Military History WikiProject, I have to ask/tell you something. Recently on the Trojan War article, the infobox was removed. Now, I'm not sure what your policies are regarding the use of the box, but the article states that it may be used for any conflict. Since this article falls under the MilitaryHistory Project of Wikipedia, I was wondering if you could convince the editors down there to readd the infobox. The Trojan War was a real conflict, whether or not all the facts are completely straight, and I want this article to be treated fairly. Thank you for your time sir. Reply back on my talk page please.--Valkyrie Red (talk) 00:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


Sir, I have made too many mistakes in the past to try and do anything by myself. I would be honored if you would help me reach a new consensus in re-introducing the box. My many thanks--Valkyrie Red (talk) 01:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Bugle lead

Anything else besides the fact that a new format will be used? Anything on the milhist project! cmon, there's got to be somthing to say. Go back and update that newsletter. Buggie111 (talk) 03:28, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Starcraft 2

Thanks for the full protection on StarCraft 2. Things were getting a bit dicey with 3RR and all. FYI, I was able to locate that this was stemming from a forum. Again, thanks for the intervention. I would have requested it, had I not gone to bed immediately after my edit. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 16:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Tom, I was the person who originally added the criticism section. I do think that it was valid and it would be nice to discuss a way to include it while maintaining the standards set for wikipedia. Could you please let me know what was lacking or in what way the section violated wiki rules. The criticism mentioned has been widely covered by game industry media and in one case garnered 250,000 names on a petition to encourage changes. So I do feel that it meets the notoriety requirements. But I am still fairly new to wikipedia edits so I very much appreciate any insight or direction you might give me. Thanks :) Zuchinni one (talk) 17:21, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the good advice and encouragement. I thought about what you said regarding the development section and I believe you are right, that any additions go in there. After all the product IS still in development and we don't know what the final results will be. I've been doing a lot of searching on the web for various reliable sources and I currently have 8 original sources that would probably qualify as reliable under the wikipedia guidelines. They include the original interview with the Blizzard founder and article from four different gaming websites discussing the issues. Once a final decision is reached regarding inclusion please feel free to tell me if the articles I've referenced don't meet the wiki standards Zuchinni one (talk) 21:41, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Titan's Cross

 The Titan's Cross in Bronze 
For being the main driving force and father of the Operation Majestic Titain, as well as your incredible work on the Iowa-class Featured Topic, I am pleased to award you the Titan's Cross in Bronze. Good job and keep up the amazing work!--White Shadows you're breaking up 01:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the cross Tom! Cam (Chat) 03:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
You're The Man Now, Dog! bahamut0013wordsdeeds 12:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Yep. Ceremony last Thursday (class Valedictorian), banquet last Friday, aftergrads stretched from Friday to Sunday-ish. I still haven't recovered on sleep, but it was the most fun I've ever had in my life. Thanks for the good wishes. Cam (Chat) 22:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
I see somebody has been checking out my userpage. FYI, "sarge" is a major gaffe for Marines (see List of United States Marine Corps acronyms and expressions#R). bahamut0013wordsdeeds 22:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
No, not at all; If I'd expected you to know better, I would have been teasing you about it. And please, just call be baha, I try to separate myself from my identity as a Marine on Wikipedia to avoid the appearance that I speak for anyone than myself. Maybe that will change if I can get that internship at the History Division... bahamut0013wordsdeeds 11:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Old Editor

Hey Tom, they just brought up the old MiliHist editor on the Trojan War thing. I was wondering if you could say anything back.--Valkyrie Red (talk) 16:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 31 May 2010

Talkback

Hello, TomStar81. You have new messages at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history.
Message added 00:28, 3 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 00:28, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Request

Would you be able to mention the reactivation of the IRC channel for the Military History project on the newsletter? I figure that advertising it is best achieved through something other than the project page and this is actually something worthy of mention as we are averaging only five users at a time. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

End the Discussion

Tom, I really hate to bother you on this matter once again, but I am positive that a new consensus has been reached. Akhilleus has failed to come up with a beneficial counter-argument and thus has resulted to stubbornness to keep up his argument. Not only that, but he threatens to edit war if we try and return the infobox, despite the new consensus. Thank you.--Valkyrie Red (talk) 00:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

How come they didn't need to use a strawberry poll to reach consensus and we have to?--Valkyrie Red (talk) 00:41, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I truly do not mean to sound the way I seem, but that is quite unfair. Sir, I believe it should be you to have the final say in this matter. I do not think that there is any point in going into a poll.--Valkyrie Red (talk) 00:48, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Review of closure process 2 results

Hi TomStar81, because you contributed to FPC's recent review, I'm letting you know that the results of the poll have been posted. We appreciate your contributions to the first stage and hope you take part in this next step, here, to move towards implementing several changes to the process. Regards, Maedin\talk 18:31, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

When updating the newsletter...

... please remember that you need to update the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/Current newsletter page and the news archive page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News, on top of the MILHIST announcements template as you have been doing. It is always seems to be overlooked ;) Thanks, Woody (talk) 18:24, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)

The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:46, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Re:StarCraft II

please forgive my errors in formatting here. i believe you recently reverted an edit of mine to the starcraft 2 page while i was attributing sources. i now understand that 2 of the sources i was using were inappropriate, however the third source which i was putting up as you reverted the article is should be appropriate. in the event you remember the incident in question i present the 3rd of many potential sources, for your acceptance or denial.

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=129301

although the source is on a forum, the relevant portion is the transcript of interviews. the forum is merely there to facilitate comments on the article. the site is the premier starcraft and starcraft 2 english language newsite, and trusted throughout the starcraft 2 community. further, the material i was presenting in the edit under criticism is universally accepted to be fact. i understand the need for verifiable information, and it is clear i should have spent more time planning my edit, but the edit was perhaps 15 minutes old when you reverted it.

in closing i appologize for using at least to inappropriate sources, but i would greatly appreciate a thumbs up or down on the source i provided above for future reference.

thank-you in advance for your attention in this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeremysaint (talk • contribs) 09:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

consensus on navweapons.com as RS

Hey, I saw you adding a discussion from userpage about navweapons.com where consensus to the OMT. I just want to inform you that on WP:RSN a similar discussion is going on where no such consensus is reached as of yet. Yoenit (talk) 09:17, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Exams

Good luck with the studying! Math is a bitch of a course regardless of what level you're at. I'm somewhat fortunate; if my IB exam results are good enough, I can avoid science and math altogether in university and stick solely to what I'm good at (Social Sciences, languages). When do you write them? Cam (Chat) 00:59, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah. Best of luck with that. How many exams? Cam (Chat) 01:28, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Oh dear. I remarked earlier this past May that one could not understand the term "cruel and unusual punishment" until they had written a 3.5 hour university-level physics exam. I may have to reconsider that now. Cam (Chat) 01:32, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 June 2010

Centralized Milhist discussion

Hey Tom, I wanted to throw this past you before I toss it to the wolves:

I was browsing the Signpost today, and while I normally merely skim over the features and admins page, I noticed that all too often, I was seeing the results of closed discussions where I would have like to have had some part in (such as Wikipedia:Featured article review/S-mine/archive1). I was wondering if there is a centralized place to see military-related discussions? I am aware that Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Military‎ exists (mostly for AfD, the other XfDs don't tend to get listed because it has to be done manually), and that most ACR and FAC/FAR tend to be listed at WT:WPMILHIST. In the case of the latter, however, I can't watchlist the page because the edits are so frequent that it would swamp my watchlist, and the notice for the example above was buried anyway. I was hoping that if such a page didn't exist, we could look into creating it so that editors can watchlist one page and get all the updates they need to the status of articles in our scope, and maybe notices to actions on prominent MILHIST editors (such as RfA or ArbCom). bahamut0013wordsdeeds 20:27, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

What you are looking for is Template:WPMILHIST Announcements -MBK004 20:33, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Ah, that looks like the crux of it. Thanks, MBK! bahamut0013wordsdeeds 20:43, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 June 2010

Help please

Do you know where I can find the list of requested Military History articles? AirplaneProRadioChecklist 22:53, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if the project as a whole maintains a list of requested articles (I'm sure we probably do, but I would have to ask someone about that); however, the task forces do maintain lists of request articles and those whould be listed somewhere out on the main task force page. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:45, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 June 2010

Talkback

Hello, TomStar81. You have new messages at SchuminWeb's talk page.
Message added 06:07, 24 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 June 2010

SITREP

Just dropping by to wish you well with your studies :) Hope to see you back soon, EyeSerenetalk 07:36, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 July 2010

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)



The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LII (June 2010) 		Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial
Project news

Catch up with our project's activities over the last month, including the new Recruitment working group and Strategy think tank

Articles

Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content

Members

June's contest results plus the latest awards to our members

Editorial

LeonidasSpartan shares his thoughts on how, as individual editors, we can deal with frustration and disappointment in our group endeavour

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:45, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


National School Sailing Association

Hello TomStar81 - you appear to have deleted an page I wrote about the National School Sailing Association after is was flagged as copyrighted material - IT IS NOT COPYRIGHTED - as I wrote the source text. However somebodies automated bot searched the web, found the original text and then flagged it. Within seconds you choose to delete it.

Your behavior is unacceptable to me. How can any new users be given the change to author anything if their work is deleted with being given the chance to defend it?? Clearly you do not appear to very tolerant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noodles955 (talk • contribs) 21:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

article was renamed in FAC

ACR should be under Siege of Godesberg (1583). Try here, which leads to this. Someone annoyed us both by renaming it. auntieruth (talk) 22:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Oooops The Pursuit of Glory: Europe 1648–815

Tom, I moved this page, and made a typo in the title: The Pursuit of Glory: Europe 1648–815. Obviously it should be 1815. Can you fix this? it requires an administrator. auntieruth (talk) 18:40, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 July 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 July 2010

Proof your accusations

here what you said: " If the committee moves to restrict blablaa's disruptive editting with sanctions then it should be easier for us to block him and keep the articles and the POV down.", please give me diffs which clearly show my german bias POV editing. Give me diffs or take back your accusation Blablaaa (talk) 05:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

CAT:AOTR

Hi, I noticed that you have three pages in this category, your main user page and User:TomStar81/Archive as well as User:TomStar81/Sandbox... it's probably best to only be in one time, if possible. If you could fix it, great, if not, I may try to do it for you but I'm not totally clear on page structure. Best. ++Lar: t/c 16:38, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Was unaware that these two pages we listed in the category. I'll see if I can do something about it this week, but I may have to wait until the weekend when I have more time to devote to matters other than studying. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:53, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
"Whenever" is soon enough. If I can suss out what they are doing I'll try to fix it myself. ++Lar: t/c 06:17, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
After spending most of today thinking about whyu the pages would be listed there without a designated category link I was about to throw in the towel for the day when it came to me in a moment of enlightenment: the reason the pages are there was because I had been fiddling with the userboxes on them and the admin one had recall=yes set; that is why they appeared in the above mentioned category. I have corrected the problem, and thanks for bringing this to my attention. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Good sleuthing! Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 13:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Honest question

Can you give me a short overview what you consider bias and more important how people who are bias, work this into articles? Eventually you have to face the "double standart" question. Regarding the fact that you avoided to commit yourself to much to the issue, your postion at the moment is some kind of "pleasent" while other people already are behind the point of no return. So maybe you want to start discuss asap... Blablaaa (talk) 21:57, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Watch what you say and how you word it. I tried to avoid committing myself, and the moment I did, I suddenly became part of the conspiracy! Hilarious and ridiculous... —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 22:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
dont know if you are part of something what you call "conspiracy" . Are you ? You deleted all my comments after i pointed you to some edits of enigma thats all i know at the moment Blablaaa (talk) 22:54, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Your opinion is in concrete thats normal when people are friends with others. Blablaaa (talk) 22:55, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
You are supporting, encouraging, and repeating Caden's unfounded allegations that there is an anti-German cabal at Milhist. That's enough for me. I can tell you with certainty that there is no such cabal. If there was, I would certainly know about it and would have exposed it for what it was long ago. As I said on the RfC, I wouldn't stand for shit like that.
As long as you continue to repeat and/or believe Caden's ridiculous claims, I will have no further part in dialogue with you, because you are simply slandering my respected colleagues, people I work with on a regular basis to improve Milhist and the encyclopedia. I don't have time to deal with shit like this. —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 23:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I never said there is an anti german bias on milhist, i claim their is a pro british. I also did not say something how heavy this is, it can be slight like everymens bias or heavy. Your assumption that it is certain that there is NO bias is a contradicting of human psychology. Read wikis of other nations regarding topics of national interessts. The question is the amount of bias. And if it is too much, and i think it is. While my bias was never prooven via diffs i will try this. If correct standarts will be applied one diff alone should be enough because for my bias no diff was needed. Blablaaa (talk) 23:15, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I've sent you an email. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 02:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

i responded at my talk Blablaaa (talk) 19:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 July 2010

Orphaned non-free image File:Ghost in the Shell World Map (S.A.C. 2nd GIG).jpg

⚠
⚠
 Thanks for uploading File:Ghost in the Shell World Map (S.A.C. 2nd GIG).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).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:31, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Re:American Empire

Someone made a free version of the American Empire so its original claim under fair use was pretty shaky. Unfortunately, I don't think there's room in the article to keep both. Sorry, Axem Titanium (talk) 23:40, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

VPC

— raekyT 23:53, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 August 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 August 2010

Thanks, but another question, what about this? ResMar 23:58, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Nvm, I think is see artifacts >.> ResMar 23:59, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm having fun playing around with Special:Random/File. ResMar 00:03, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

FAC Message

Hi Tomstar,

Thanks for letting me know. What I was trying (Unsuccessfully) to do was to generate some footprints to this article. As you can see from the state of the Review, there's been the usual checks but not very many content coverage comments as such.   Perseus 71 talk 00:10, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Apologies for bothering you again. But this article was archived by the BOT as not promoted ostensibly for lack of support. That makes me wonder if it at all hit the urgent marker at all ? Yes I do understand the overwhelming number articles and shortage of reviewers. So here's my question. Should I renominate given that there were no oppose ? More so, is there a point at all for me to renominate it ? This is a first for me that the nomination was archived for lack of response so some advice would be appreciated.   Perseus 71 talk 00:49, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I will renominate after two weeks.   Perseus 71 talk 16:47, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Speech

This humble servant would like to share this speech made before the Commission of the Latino American Museum, with his friends: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=423585291337 Tony the Marine (talk) 23:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 August 2010

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)



The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIII (July 2010) 		Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial
Project news

New parameter for military conflict infobox introduced;
Preliminary information on the September coordinator elections

Articles

Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content

Members

July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy

Editorial

Opportunities for new military history articles

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:04, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

university

I just finished reading through your "what I am up to" section on your userpage, and noticed the bit about your Masters' Degree troubles. I just wanted to let you know I share your angst. It seems as though they deliberately put bureaucracy in place solely for the sake of frustrating people (have you ever tried to find out about Residence room arrangements/applications?). Best of luck; my prayers are with you. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 04:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

That seems like a rather poor publicity choice on the part of UTEP, especially given that a portion of the tier 1-4 ranking system is based on the assessment of former and current students. It seems even more perplexing given that that's also where you did your undergraduate degree, and are thus an alumnus. I could theoretically see a justification for much of their behavior if it were a university that had no previous record, interaction or experience with you (or if it were the Ivy Leagues or "Oxbridge", I suppose), but that isn't the case. None of that sits well for UTEP's future if your case is the rule rather than the exception (which I'm guessing is the scenario here...); pissed off alumni don't donate to the school. If you are jaded and marginalized by the institution, you're not about to shell out part of your paycheque to it after you're done there. Given UTA and UTEP's relatively close stats in terms of student numbers (21,000 undergrads vs 17,000 undergrads; similar size comparison of University of Calgary and Queen's University on my side of the border), any difference in reputation and funding is purely based on their performance. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 00:35, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Fun! Fortunately, the Canada/U.S. Drug war is in the middle of a 200-year lowpoint at the moment :P. I had a friend of mine who spent the last semester in Honduras. One of the few places you're likely to read "classes canceled due to Military Coup" in your email. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 00:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

FYI, I restored an article that you deleted.

You deleted Angamoozhy, which was nominated for speedy deletion as lacking enough context to identify the subject. At the time you deleted it the first line was "Angamoozhy is a village in Pathanamthitta district located in Kerala,India." which clearly establishes that this is about a village in Kerala, India. I have therefore restored the article. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I disagree with your undeletion, however I am not going to argue or debate the points of the undeletion. My recommendation would be to go to WP:INDIA and ask there two cents on the matter, as its members would likely be in a position to decide what course of action is best for the article. TomStar81 (Talk) 19:51, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
I think you may have missed the point. Whether the article deserves to be kept in the long term is not really the issue, you deleted it as lacking sufficient context to identify the subject when context was clearly established in the first sentence. I have added it to both the India and Kerala wikiprokjects so that they can asses the article. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 August 2010

FPC delist nom

Hi. An image you originally (and successfully) nominated for FP was recently nominated for delisting. Although the voting period is technically over, I am holding this open so you have the opportunity to comment. Don't feel obligated to; I just wanted to make sure you had the chance. Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 01:16, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Re:Notification of reply to your opposition

Hello, TomStar81. You have new messages at Raeky's talk page.
Message added 02:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, TomStar81. You have new messages at Raeky's talk page.
Message added 13:20, 28 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for the barnstar!

Thank you very much for your kind words, and sorry for stealing the featured picture :( - Zephyris Talk 10:18, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Milhist A-class and Peer reviews Jul-Dec 2009

 The WikiChevrons 
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews during the period July-December 2009, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons.  Roger Davies talk 10:39, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Milhist A-class and Peer reviews Jan-Jun 2010

 The WikiChevrons 
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews during the period January-June 2010, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons.  Roger Davies talk 10:46, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Various

First, I'm sorry for your loss. My condolences.

Second, I'd already started when I saw your message: still at least you have had yours :) Here are the templates I'd prepared for the others: so that should save you some time,  Roger Davies talk 11:07, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Updated templates
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

{{subst:CRM|By order of the ''[[WP:MILHIST|Military history WikiProject coordinators]]'', for your devoted work on the WikiProject's [[WP:MHPR|Peer]] and [[WP:MHR#A-CLASS|A-Class]] reviews during the period July-December 2009, I am delighted to award you this ''Content Review Medal''. ~~~~ }}

{{subst:Milhist-review-1stripe| By order of the ''[[WP:MILHIST|Military history WikiProject coordinators]]'', for your good work helping with the WikiProject's [[WP:MHPR|Peer]] and [[WP:MHR#A-CLASS|A-Class]] reviews during the period July-December 2009, I hereby award you this ''[[WP:MILHIST|Military history WikiProject]] Reviewers' award''. ~~~~}}

{{subst:CRM|By order of the ''[[WP:MILHIST|Military history WikiProject coordinators]]'', for your devoted work on the WikiProject's [[WP:MHPR|Peer]] and [[WP:MHR#A-CLASS|A-Class]] reviews during the period January-June 2010, I am delighted to award you this ''Content Review Medal''. ~~~~ }}

{{subst:Milhist-review-1stripe| By order of the ''[[WP:MILHIST|Military history WikiProject coordinators]]'', for your good work helping with the WikiProject's [[WP:MHPR|Peer]] and [[WP:MHR#A-CLASS|A-Class]] reviews during the period January-June 2010, I hereby award you this ''[[WP:MILHIST|Military history WikiProject]] Reviewers' award''. ~~~~}}

{{subst:Milhist-review-2stripe| By order of the ''[[WP:MILHIST|Military history WikiProject coordinators]]'', for your good work helping with the WikiProject's [[WP:MHPR|Peer]] and [[WP:MHR#A-CLASS|A-Class]] reviews during the period January-June 2010, I hereby award you this ''[[WP:MILHIST|Military history WikiProject]] Reviewers' award''. ~~~~}}

elections

I did promise to look seriously at running for coordinator this September. What are the requirements--did they change based on the 1 election per year decision, or....? auntieruth (talk) 21:08, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Nothing has changed from last time in so far as requirements are concerned: we are still looking for editors willing spend time on reviewing and article assessment, and to help oversee the administrative aspects of milhist as a whole. The only major difference is that this time around the coordinators will hold office for a full year instead of six months - done in the hopes that, with longer terms, we may be able to accomplish more since our lineup will not change as often as it has been. Like Rodger, I too would encourage you to run: I feel that you would make an outstanding coordinator for the project. TomStar81 (Talk) 01:09, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Do we have any idea when the pages will be up? Cam (Chat)(Prof) 01:45, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Sweet; thanks forletting me know. I'm giving consideration to running again, so I was just curious as to when stuff went live. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 13:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your consideration, but I have to respectfully decline. I simply don't have the time or the motivation to dedicate to the requisite administrative tasks. For one, my participation in content review was limited to two cases: one with minimal input and work from myself, and the other... well, we both know that the naval gunfire debate article didn't go so hot. And though I know it's not a requirement, I don't even have the admin bit. I suppose if you feel you need some more blood after the election, I wouldn't resist being co-oped, but that is out of a sense of duty and need. Cheers, bahamut0013wordsdeeds 14:36, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2010

Re: Award

Whoah, how did I earn that award? I haven't been active in this project foR a long time. I occasionally do minor things but thats about it. I don't think Ive ever participated in a review?:/  Burningview  ✉ 02:05, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Thankyou Tom for the award on behalf of the coordinators. I appreciate it greatly, but I do not feel that I can be considered to have earned it - I made about three minor comments just to assuage my guilt while having my A-Class review considered. Thanks very much for your kind thoughts anyway. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:12, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Tom. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:21, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Award

Thank you very much for the reviewer's award. It was most unexpected and quite nice. Finetooth (talk) 02:37, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer award

Hello Tom. Thanks for the award, but I don't really think that I have earned it. Quite the contrary actually, for my only participation in the review department in July-December 2009 were, IIRC, the articles I nominated myself for review. Constantine ✍ 03:32, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the award mate. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 06:38, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Ill tag on here - cheers! :)EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 08:33, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the award, but I dont think I deserve it. I reviewed only 1/2 articles at that time. --Redtigerxyz Talk 15:53, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Hey, that's about what i thot too. Maybe TomStar81 is trying to jolly us around to participating more, and to earn the award better now. :) Well, i am not immune to a little flattery, i like it, and i'll display the award, and probably think i have to do more, too. And, TomStar suggests we post {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to our Talk pages, so that we know about the ongoing reviews. But, right at the moment, that does not seem to display what it should, at least not how i have it posted on my Talk page now. TomStar, could you possibly please edit my talk page to fix the display, if there's anything i did wrong, or suggest here what might be the display problem? Thanks! --doncram (talk) 16:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2010

Olympia

Hey Tom, we both rewrote the lead section at about the same time. I saved my version as well so we could look at both. Feel free to do whatever with it. Parsecboy (talk) 18:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I reworked your lead a bit. Perhaps we could let it stand a bit for discussion and further contributions. I ordered a reference book today, as suggested by Parseboy, with expedited shipping, so should have it within the week for providing citations in support of your excellent information. --Kevin Murray (talk) 19:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Tom, I goofed in my prior commnets. Betweent he time I read your changes and got in to edit, Parsecboy had saved his changes. I actually edited his work, not yours. I really like the rich information that you brought in and by itself it would make a fairly complete short article. However, I think that you probably have a bit too much information for a lead section. Typically Wp leads are fairly brief overviews, then the meat is in the subsequent paragraphs. Unfortunately in a longer article there is so much detail in the subsequent paragraphs, that the continuity of the "story" is lost. Let's talk more. --Kevin Murray (talk) 19:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Tom, thanks for your excellent comments at my talk page. Kevin --Kevin Murray (talk) 21:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIV (August 2010)



The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIV (August 2010) 		Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial
Project news

The return of reviewer awards, task force discussions, and more information on the upcoming coordinator election

Articles

A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles, including a new featured sound

Members

Our newest A-class medal recipients and this August's top contestants

Editorial

In the first of a two-part series, Moonriddengirl discusses the problems caused by copyright violations

To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Yikes!

Malleus corrected a significant typo in my response to you on my talk page-- I hope you got it :) Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:19, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Dr Petrova (C&CR).JPG

⚠
⚠
 Thanks for uploading File:Dr Petrova (C&CR).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. Hammersoft (talk) 18:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nod Inner Circle (C&CTS).jpg

⚠
⚠
 Thanks for uploading File:Nod Inner Circle (C&CTS).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. Hammersoft (talk) 18:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TomStar81/Archive_11&oldid=1242052773"