User talk:Trlkly/archive

Welcome

Hello, Trlkly/archive, Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at the Guide to layout, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my New-Users' Talk Page.

Additional tips:

Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:

If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
You might want to add yourself to the New User Log
If your first language isn't English, try Wikipedia:Contributing to articles outside your native language
Full details on Wikipedia style can be found in the Manual of Style.

Happy editing!

Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 13:45, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Autosigner

Hi! I was just wondering what it is you hate about the "autosigner". It's nothing more than a labour-saving device – writing four tildes is simply easier and quicker than writing out your name, the date and the time etc. And, what's more, it makes your username clickable, so people can go straight to your talk-page without having to copy and paste. What's wrong with that? I agree with your point on the IPA talk page by the way. garik 20:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, I should have been more specific with my terminology. What I hate is the bot that goes around signing previously unsigned posts. "The previously unsigned comment was written by <X>" just sounds elitist to me. And useless. Why can't it just sign it normally so that nobody has to use the tildes? Is it really necessary to point out who is a newb or just plain forgetful?

As you can see from that comment (which has been unsigned for almost a year, and which I've just had to mark as unsigned myself), the bot doesn't always notice unsigned comments, and can certainly take more than a couple of hours to react, so we couldn't trust it to keep a fast conversation coherently annotated.

The "previously unsigned" line is good for context; if someone deliberately posts a comment without a signature, it'd be misleading to make it look as if they had signed it, themselves. And it's important to remind people to use the tilde, rather than suggesting that a bot will always catch them in future. --McGeddon (talk) 09:29, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed your autosign, per the discussion on your own user_talk. And I am intentionally not signing this comment. It's my user_talk, it should be obvious. And if it isn't, there's always the "History" button.

Sinebot is using the default {{unsigned}} template, and it's completely standard practice for human editors to use it as well, to help make the flow of talk pages more readable. If somebody fails to sign a comment, it's unclear as to who said it, particularly if another editor adds a comment directly afterwards (the previous paragraph, for example, isn't me talking). I'm not doing anything unusual to prove a point, here; thousands of editors use the {{unsigned}} template every day, it's just that Sinebot often gets there first.

If you'd prefer to see a different wording, you should bring this up on the template's talk page. I'm not sure I've seen a wiki automatically signing comments (it seems like you'd get false positives when you were just editing a comment or adding a template), but if you want to suggest it, head over to the village pump.

I'll try to remember to not to use this template on your comments in the future. --McGeddon (talk) 08:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it looks like you can tell Sinebot never to sign your comments. You will get other editors applying the same template to your unsigned comments, though - as I say, this is completely standard behaviour, and no editor would think to check someone's user page before doing so. --McGeddon (talk) 16:05, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if that came across as a dig, then - I wasn't ignoring your comment about the {{unsigned}} template, I just read it as a criticism of a necessary evil.

Given that you'll get most of your {{unsigned}} templates from passing strangers who'll never see you again, I don't think you'll gain anything by actively admonishing them for it on their talk pages - you might as well just quietly delete the template and explain in the edit summary. --McGeddon (talk) 20:08, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Smallville

You might want to look at the bottom of the page, as the area you left your comment in has not been active in awhile. At the bottom, in the "merge" section there is a current debate. As for Stargate, I'll refer to a common rebuttle that is used here on Wiki, two wrongs don't make a right. I'll pick a Stargate episode at random, it happens to be the first episode of season 3, Into the Fire (Stargate SG-1). This is nothing but a plot. This violates 2 things, and they are both copyrights. The first copyright it violates is the episode itself, because you cannot simply write up a plot, especially not one that descriptive, and have nothing encyclopedic around it. That amounts to theft (see replicating copyrighted material). What that says is Wikipedia will provide a substitution for watching episodes, for free. The other thing is that, without critical commentary, the use of that image is a violation of copyright (see non-free image criteria). I'm not saying that no episodes deserve their own article (see my edit for the Smallville pilot), just that 130+ episode do not deserve their own page. The only arguments I've ever come across for this debate have always been either "the season pages will be too long" or "other articles do it that way". As I said in the current debate, we don't know how long the season pages will be because no one lets them actually develop. We don't research any real-world context for them, and don't try and keep plot summaries in check from becoming grossly negligent to copyrights. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm indifferent. It's an old discussion. We've had debates on this before, and Peregrine opts to try different Smallville pages to announce his attempt to create an article for every episode, even after there was clear consensus that he shouldn't. What I would like is if you would take a look at the current discussion (titled "Merge"). Not only am I calling for a merger of all (but the pilot episode, for the time beind) episodes back into the season pages, but I've proposed a new format (which you can find by clicking the link that I supplied in the discussion) for the season pages that will keep the plots in-check and provide production information and reception information for all the episodes that do not have enough to support themselves in their own articles. I explain the difference between what the size of an article actually is, and what you see when you click the edit screen. I've helped the pilot episode find the substance it needs to actually be stable (i'm withholding the reception section so that I can develop it into good prose), but there are 21 episodes in season 1, and from the source that I'm using, only about 2-4 will actually support an entire article by themselves. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 22:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look forward to your criticism when you return, but as far as Stargate goes, it's also on their website. That doesn't change the fact that it violates Wiki's policy on plots, Notability guidelines and the idea behind when an article should be created. Anyway, I won't keep you from getting your rest any further. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I wasn't going to attack SG. First, I don't watch SG, so I would never really be able to help it. I believe that the best help you can give is when you are familiar with the topic (which some people think otherwise, but if you set aside any fanboy opinions then it can help); I think that you should always try and see if you can help the article first. Second, the debate link I gave you clearly says "Avoid massive AfDs". You could do it, but you'll probably piss off more people, plus they are generally inaffective because of the "fanboys" that protect the pages. People generally look over a lot of AfD nominations in that huge list that grows day by day, so the people that generally "vote" are the ones that happen to monitor the pages regularly. That's why I went to the merger, and left notes on WP:TV and the Controversial merger page. I still haven't gotten that much response, because the "entertainment" community are not really that respected in the Wiki world. Our articles are generally seen as not worthy to be on Wiki. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:08, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heck no. I find Wiki valuable on an academic level, but I take it all with a grain of salt and immediately look for a footnote at the end of the sentence or paragraph so that I can use that as a source (if it's reliable). BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, also I think they could care less about certain films. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 01:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I finally finished the work on the season page. Take a look and tell me what you think. It needs a good copyedit for wordiness and word choices, but that's easy to find if the page is implented into the mainspace. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 17:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"User-colorable"? BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's modeled after the List of Smallville episodes table, which is modeled after each of the DVD box sets. If they don't like that color, then I shoot for plain neutral coloring. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 21:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Thanks for your message at my talk page. I've responded to you there.Ferrylodge 06:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Angry?

Who says I'm angry? That would give these ... entities power over me. If I ever catch myself feeling aggravated/annoyed, I simply catch myself and say, "Don't." It's that simple.

And I never was "permablocked." I haven't/never really kept track of any of all that, but I'm assuming that whatever block you're referring to expired months ago. I just haven't bothered to change my user page since, well, forever.

I have absolutely no desire to be an administrator -- never did. And there's no way I could or would pretend to be anything other than what I am. What you read is what you get. No subterfuge, no sockpuppets, no simpering. I'm pretty much in your face. What can I say? To know me is to love me. ;) Bless. dee.

AfD nomination of TV Tropes Wiki

An article that you have been involved in editing, TV Tropes Wiki, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TV Tropes Wiki. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? WLU (talk) 18:56, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya,

Regards your discussion on the AFD, please make sure you refer to the deletion guidelines - right now your !vote is an actual 'vote', meaning there's no policy- or guideline-based reasoning for keeping the page (at least by my reading). Be sure to read arguments to avoid during deletion discussion, I interpret your 'weak keep' as a variant of WP:ILIKEIT. I agree that TV Tropes is a borderline case of notability, so generally the best thing to do is seek out more sources and expand as much as possible.

Regards drafting pages and presenting them for review, you can always userfy the page to a sub-page if the article does get deleted, then keep looking for sources until you find enough to demonstrate notability per WP:WEB, then ask an admin or other user to review before moving to mainspace. This way the previous work is not wasted in case the wiki does get sufficient attention in the future that it's no longer of questionable notability. Were I in your situation, that's what I'd do, but no one says I'm right. WLU (talk) 10:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The following is originally from WLU's talk page. I copied it here so readers can see the complete discussion.

I did not use policy in discussing this, as, frankly, I hate it when people do that to me. In my mind, too many "policies" assume bad faith. I mean, take WP:ILIKEIT as an example. It seems to assume that I edited this page out of ignorance or just because I liked the topic. It very plainly asserts that my opinion is worthless. How can you do that without assuming bad faith/being uncivil? Especially since I specifically wrote "I really don't care if the article gets deleted"? It's like calling me a liar.

Now, that said, I get your point. Since you used policy to back up your claims, you want me to, as well. Fine, I can try, even if that means actually reading them again, as they've probably changed since I started editing. (WP:BIO came out since then. I'd say it's been a while.). I hate that we have to have them, but I guess it is a necessary evil. Let's see if I can find that essay specifically written to combat yours. (It's in your domain, so you have some claim of ownership on it.) I can't at the moment, and I've been looking a while. It kinda bothers me that WP:ATA doesn't link to it's opposition. The essay I'm looking for basically says that even ILIKEIT should be considered, as people generally like notable, well-written articles. The unfairness argument above is entirely my own creation, and I have no idea how to search and see if other people might have the same opinion.

(Sorry for being so verbose. The only policy I flat out WP:IAR around here is the one that limits me to a 100-word response. Not even Wikipedia's worth the hours it takes me to concatenate my own work.)

-- trlkly 14:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll reply here 'cause otherwise I might miss your talk page on my watchlist, but I'll drop you a line to let you know. I'll also refrain from my usual deluge of policy and guideline wikilinks, I love a lot of blue in my writing :) I'm also hardly one to criticize another editor for lengthy replies, so on this page at least please feel free to ignore the 100-word limit. Though 1000 words may be a bit much to read and reply to.

The reason why policies and guidelines exist is to limit the contents of wikipedia and try to make it adhere to a reasonable standard of verification that will make it a reliable source of information. Since everyone has an opinion, the guidelines exist to set standards that will ensure that the ability to verify takes precedence over the ability to opine - in general the standards for notability are pretty basic. There must be evidence that someone has paid attention to the article's topic, somewhere, that's not a blog or advertisement.

I've never seen a 'counter' to the ATA articles, though m:Inclusionism over at the Meta-wiki might have something to say. The only real 'counter' would probably be a reference to the WP:N that indicates the page has done something truly notable (i.e. arguably being the first website devoted solely to TV tropes would be notable, but you'd have to prove this through the us of sources; having sources to use indicates that the page has recieved attention in independent media; ergo, the page is notable because it passes guidelines for web content). Since notability and WEB are guidelines, not policy, they can be more easily ignored if a convincing (to other editors) case can be made that the notability is actually genuine. But again, this falls back on an issue of sourcing and verification, which is policy.

Ultimately the policies are the only touchstone editors have on a publically-editable wiki. For me a complete assumption of good faith in all cases without the policies and guidelines to say what is a reliable source and what is a reasonable standard would mean a battle between the vandals and the editors for who can edit-war the most persistantly to a version they like. I've always thought the policies and guidelines were quite good and really appreciate them (you can probably tell by my extensive use of shortcuts), but as a deletionist I'm dedicated heart and soul to brutally and cruelly culling content I don't think meets the bar (which is probably set unusually high compared to other editors). Anyway, the AFD as is was borderline, leaning to deletion in my mind, but a good source would tip it towards keep. That's why I suggest the use of a sub-page to preserve the content, and if a new source pops up, it's easy to add it to the page and re-create.

As you also might have guessed, I hate IAR and wish there were a policy about when rules can be ignored. Fortunately I'm not the boss of wikipedia, otherwise it would be a much smaller, doubtless much less fun place to read and edit. WLU (talk) 15:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I didn't get from the AfD that all you needed was a good source. I may not be able to find it in time, however, as I am not feeling good and may have to go to the doctor. I personally like IAR, but only when someone can adequately explain why it is beneficial to the encyclopedia to ignore the rules in that instance, and also why it wouldn't just be better to just change the rules in the first place. I much respect you for not taking WP:AGF too strongly. I do the same thing, sometimes. Since you think TVTropes just needs a source (which I may be able to find later), I think I will take your advice and save it in my user space. I do care about the article now since it's so close. If I was the IP who created it, I'd probably care more, though. I usually don't care about articles until they are at least Good Article candidates.

Anyways, thanks for taking the time to reply so thoroughly. I appreciate it. -- trlkly 15:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In almost all cases the notability guidelines are variations on a theme - show a reliable, independent source that has paid attention to the topic, and you're pretty much good. That's only a notability guideline, the guidelines and policies for content of an article are totally different (RS, NPOV, OR, V for a bit of alphabet soup). Also note that it can't really be 'just a source', it must be independent of TV Tropes, and from a reliable source. The source must be vetted by someone independent of the person writing the information, or the person themselves must be a knowledgeable expert. Most of my nom is discussing the failings of the current sources to show as far as I'm concerned it doesn't pass notability, but the core problem is at the bottom. The part where I basically said all it needed is a source and discussion is at the bottom of my nomination, where I say "Per WP:WEB, there is a lack of non-trivial discussion in reliable sources to indicate the site has received extensive attention."

I realize it can seem tedious, but if you're going to spend a lot of time on wikipedia it's very worth reading at least the basic policies and guidelines - it'll make your wiki-life a lot easier and give common ground with other editors. It's a rocky and steep learning curve initially, for sure, but if you're going to be on-wiki for the long term, it's pretty much essential. Fortunately in most cases it's pretty basic:

Sounds like you got bit, which is pretty common and definitely a souring experience if it happens early. If you're really interested in wikipedia, you might consider adoption, which pairs you with an experienced user and can make your life a lot easier. The other option is asking other users for help/advice, admins are usually good choices. My favourite is User:FisherQueen 'cause she's also really funny, and User:SandyGeorgia is a non-admin who is incredibly knowledgeable. WLU (talk) 17:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[from my page]

Also, here is a loooong essay that covers just about everything I think is worth talking about on wikipedia. It's sometimes funny and I try to cover a lot of the mores and rules of thumb that govern wikipedia as a community rather than an ideal. WLU (talk) 17:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[from his]

That was very perceptive of you that I got bit in the past. As a former Intelligent Design proponent, I got bit when I claimed that certain parts of it weren't NPOV enough. (Someone actually deleted some of my comments on the talk page explaining my POV, which really miffed me. Oddly enough, my changes made it through anyways.) I then dedicated myself to be more of a WikiGnome than anything, so policy doesn't come up often in my edits. Usually what I know and can source about a subject has already been said. I'll sometimes add things I want sourced to talk pages and ask people to source them.

Anyways, I've been editing on TVTropes for a little while, when I discovered I had a lot to contribute and that conflicts were rare. Someone mentioned the fledgling article, so I went there to try and bring it up to standards. That's were my "work" came in. I thought I'd done a fairly good job for a stub, and left it for someone else to improve. Then I get an AfD notice. I honestly wondered what I could do not to lose my work. TVTropes has this thing called You Know That Thing Where where you can propose articles, so I thought WP might have something similar. Using my user space never donned on me, as that is against policy on TVTropes.

ADOPTION sounds kinda cool, but, as I edit so infrequently, I'm not sure it would be a good idea. I had no idea who was considered a good editor around here, so I hadn't ever really asked anyone for help. I'm also a big Do-It-Yourselfer. I'm also pretty big on the idea that policies should be simple enough not to have to read them that often. I understand that every eventuality has to attempt to be covered, but that the average editor shouldn't have to know them in detail. I know the rules, I just didn't know that my sources weren't good enough for notability.

Oh, and finally, I understand what you meant in your AfD about the sources not being reliable enough. I misspoke when I said "just needed a source". I meant a "good source", one good enough for use on Wikipedia. It can take a lot of effort to find sources when you don't know where to look, and, as I am just a casual editor, it might take me longer than the time the AfD has left. I thought we would need several, which I didn't figure would happen anytime soon, so that's why I said I didn't care if the article got deleted. I would just add information about how Wikipedia still doesn't find TVTropes notable to the NoSuchThingAsNotability page there. (They definitely aren't deletionists.) I am BigT over there. I don't know if you'd enjoy it, but you're obviously welcome to check out that wiki. I think it's amazing what you can do with so few rules. Before the Great Crash, our articles were often #1 on Google. We're fairly definitive in our field, as we're the only ones who have bothered naming most tropes consistently. If only I could find a (good, reliable) source to back that up...

-- trlkly 16:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like the work of Hrafn. I actually have a lot of respect for Hrafn, s/he's got a massive amount of expertise and balls/ovaries the size of a Glyptodon (by the way, I'm a huge fan of Darwin and evolution). From a pro-evolution perspective, there's so many cranks raising spurious creationist comments on many of the pages that it's often quicker for all around to bite first and not care about the result (doesn't make it right, just efficient). I mean, there's only so many times you can deal with 'evolution is just a theory' or 'macroevolution has never been seen' before fangs are bared (and they're so delicious). The creationist perspective gets virtually no real positive attention because there are no real reliable sources, the points are spurious and it's a cultural topic that keeps trying to intrude in the scientific arena. I have lots of advice for editors who are creationists who wish to edit wikipedia, following it would result in a long and fruitful career here, but they generally don't like the fact that for the most part it's 'leave the science pages alone'. Most of them are crusaders for truth anyway and don't understand NPOV, sourcing or verifiability, and aren't interested in learning or switching topic areas. That you're still here suggests you've grasped the essence of the policies, and that you're changes ended up on a main page suggests that you actually raised some valid points, even if you were nibbled in the process. Anyway, rant is over. Glad you're still here and contributing. Wikignomes are essential parts in the biodiversity of the wikiforest, to overstretch a metaphor.

TVTropes isn't (and wasn't) terrible as far as formatting, spelling, grammar and sources, the problem is one of notability, which is fundamentally different from sourcing with totally different sets of policies and guidelines. People are talking about using TVTropes as a reference in the AFD discussion - that's totally irrelevant to whether the page should exist or not. I see the distinction as fundamental and obvious, but I've been here for nearly two years and have crammed in a lot of edits in that time. Even if the page is deleted, I highly suggestion you ask the deleting admin to userfy so if some extensive coverage in reliable sources does come up, you can easily re-create. You mention sources not being reliable in the AFD discussion, my issue is that the reliable sources are not discussing the page extensively (which I place a lot of emphasis on) while the sources that do discuss it are not reliable. I'd say this is an area where people fundamentally disagree because lots of peole have !voted to keep based on the mention in any source rather than focussing on the real key to notability - attention, discussion. It's enough to make a deletionist cry. Anyway, it looks like the page is heading for a verdict of no consensus, which is a default keep (also enough to make a deletionist cry). Keep expanding the page, eventually it'll be clearly notable if it gets enough attention (and wikipedia is part of that attention-getting process since we're usually at or near the top of the google hit list).

Anyway, if you have any more questions about wikipedia, please feel free to ask for my opinion. I make no guarantee that it's right, but often it is defensible and I'm quite pleased to show off my erudition as well as generally help.

Also, you may want to add Template:Infobox Website to the TVTropes page.WLU (talk) 18:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome ideas—both the info box and userfying to keep the history. Is there an Infobox Wiki? Anyways, I'm surprised that no consensus == keep, as I always considered WP to be a more deletionist resource. I will do my best to bring the page up to snuff. I've at least got a few more places to look for sources that actually discuss the wiki. Also, just so you know, I am a Creationist, even if I think ID is useless. I just don't let my creationism interfere when I edit biological science articles. (You'd be surprised how many don't discuss evolution anyways.) And I'm not sure God didn't use evolution to do His creating. I just think it doesn't matter in the long scheme of things.

— trlkly 17:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox isn't so much an awesome idea as it is standard for most pages. There's infoboxes for all five biological kingdoms, actors, rulers, military leaders, boats, companies, books, movies, diseases and nearly everything else on wikipedia. There's probably not an infobox wiki as they're a within-wiki phenomenon : ) I usually try to find an infobox from a similar page and copy that one (though using "Template:Infoboxname" in the search box leads you to the infobox's page where you can find instructions on how to fill it out. No consensus is usually a default keep, I'm guessing the pages you're thinking of were less 'no consensus' as 'arguments that made sense to inexperienced editors but are unconvincing per WP:N' but I'd have to see specific examples to comment. Ever read Kenneth R. Miller's book Finding Darwin's God? Good book. By your description you're probably more a borderline deist than a creationist BTW. There's also a reply on my talk page and the article's talk page for you regards that Indian artist. A good option on pages with author's website-only sourcing is a quick google search to see if there's anything independent to confirm. WLU (talk) 19:51, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Etchi

/ɛtʃi/ this is a doubled consonant. Small "tsu" before consonants doubles them as for instance in "yappari", "matto" etc.--Seibun (talk) 20:10, 19 May 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for the info, but no need to post it here and there. If you wanted to give me a heads up, just leave a link to the talk page. — trlkly 14:05, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File: Colorcomp.jpg

Can't upload a PNG version, I saved it as jpeg only. The quality is good enough to illustrate what it's all about, though... --Janke | Talk 11:46, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Trlkly. You have new messages at Danhash's talk page.
Message added 17:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Why did you move my comment to my talk page? —danhash (talk) 17:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because Wikimedia software will not send a email for any other page but your talk page, and thus, if I don't, I have no idea if you will read it. Seeing as this is the first time anyone has used it on me (as far as I can remember) I was unaware of the template you used. I assume it wasn't around when I first joined and actually occasionally got into conversations with people.

Since you don't like people moving things, and this isn't that important, I'll just leave it here for a few days until I archive it. — trlkly 04:41, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's why there's the watchlist feature. But just in general, experienced editors leaving a message on a talk page will see it if there is a reply. I'm not against moving things that need to be moved, it just surprised me since I've never seen it done before and my comment to you is out of context on my talk page (hence my added hatnote). Not a big deal. Anyway, I replied on my talk page. —danhash (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey trlkly, wanted to let you know that your IP address is on my talk page (I think you forgot to log in) in case you wanted to remove it (and in the page history in case you wanted to have it oversighted); I would have replaced it with your signature but I didn't want to edit your comment. There is also a reply and an apology there if you would like to read it. —danhash (talk) 15:14, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:SuffieldSeal.png)

Thanks for uploading File:SuffieldSeal.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:17, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dealt with it: I must have forgotten to put it in the article. — trlkly 08:41, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Certify Data Systems logo.svg)

Thanks for uploading File:Certify Data Systems logo.svg. 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:14, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dealt with by updating SVG. — trlkly 18:24, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Central Eagle Aviation logo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Central Eagle Aviation logo.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:49, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:9 Story Entertainment Logo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:9 Story Entertainment Logo.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:17, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:CNN_Dick_Cheney_obit.png

I have tagged File:CNN_Dick_Cheney_obit.png as being an orphaned non-free file. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. Otherwise, it will be deleted in seven days. — fourthords | =Λ= | 18:59, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I have with replacing this image is as follows:

It is larger (in file size) as a JPEG than as a PNG, so policy would say we'd use a PNG. It's possible yours is a better image, but that would mean it should be converted to PNG.
I am not 100% sure about the public domain status of this image. The image being uncopyrighted does help, but I'm not sure the exact text is uncopyrightable. I plan on challenging this status just so the Wikimedia Commons people can weigh in and make sure.

In light of these issues, my plan is as follows: I have placed the PNG back into the article to prevent deletion. I will convert your image to PNG and compare it to mine, and, if yours is better, I will update the Wikipedia page with it. I will also challenge your image on Wikimedia Commons to make sure it is public domain. Assuming it is, I will use the wizard to transfer the PNG to Wikimedia Commons. I will mark the JPG as another version, and then put it up for deletion, where the Wikimedia Commons people will decide whether having two different versions is useful.

None of this has anything to do with you, and I appreciate your contribution. I just want to be sure that everything is kosher before my picture is deleted, as not only do I prefer to follow policy, but it was also a bit of work to get converted properly. Cheers.

— trlkly 22:31, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In fact I would've watched your talk page, except I had the impression—from something I don't remember now—that you weren't active on the site anymore. So, even though I normally would've watched, I didn't in this instance and don't mind the reminder.

As for the image, I pulled my version from The Smoking Gun's archive as I figured they had a higher-quality and larger version (which I preferred since I was uploading to the Commons) than the en.wp version. I didn't convert it to PNG because I thought it would introduce artifacting and less-than-optimal image changes into the Cheney part of the photo; I'm under the impression that JPG is the preferred format for such photographic content. Am I wrong in that?

Before I applied the {{PD-text}}, I perused the Commons category for such licensed images, assuming they were a good standard by which to measure. Looking at those images, I felt the CNN image wouldn't qualify for copyright if they didn't. I'm unperturbed by the DR, but I hope it meets muster. Or at least if it doesn't, that it'll prompt more egregious offenders in the PD-text category be purged as well.

Thanks for the heads-up and detailed explanation; I always appreciate such thoroughness and consideration! Be well. — fourthords | =Λ= | 00:06, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Conversion to PNG doesn't modify anything at all (unlike conversion to JPG), so don't worry about that. (Well, it doesn't if you use software that can handle 32-bit PNGs). And even photos get converted if they are smaller as PNGs; they just usually aren't. Heck, there are bots that exist only to do that conversion. (see User:PNG crusade bot, for instance.) Plus computer screenshots are preferred to be in PNG format, and that usually overrides concerns about photos.

I'm not that active (mostly only handling file cleanup and conversions, as well as grammar edits). And you may be right about PD-text, based on those other images. (I should have thought of checking that.) But I think we might as well let it run its course and see what happens.

One thing I question is whether or not I should keep the white border. Normally such blank borders are removed on Wikipedia, but I notice that every source I find includes it. Do you think it should be there? (I've removed it in my conversion, but I can always put it back.) — trlkly 00:38, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any need for the white border to remain; again, I just left the image as-was from TSG without fiddling with it (because, as I probably let slip, I'm not overly skilled or knowledgable about image manipulation). — fourthords | =Λ= | 01:19, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:C.D. Santa Clara crest.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:C.D. Santa Clara crest.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Dianna (talk) 01:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It would be really awesome if you guys could set up a way to actually link me back to the article's history so I could see why the image was deleted. Or, better yet, have a way to copy in the edit reason. I'm lucky that, in this case, the image name contains the article name.

I did think it odd that I'd never seen a gallery of past logos before. — trlkly 05:50, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Annamalai University logo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Annamalai University logo.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:31, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Liceo de Cagayan arts logo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Liceo de Cagayan arts logo.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:12, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Better source request for File:Gayglers logo.png

Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:

File:Gayglers logo.png

You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 21:27, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gayglers logo.png listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Gayglers logo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:48, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:1 eurocent malta.png

Thank you for uploading File:1 eurocent malta.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eleassar ^{my talk} 08:05, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've undid your removal of the tag. Feel welcome to discuss the issue at the talk page, but do not remove the tag. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 10:07, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the tag because your reasons were invalid. The tag specifically says I can remove the tag once the situation is resolved. While it is perfectly fine for you to put the tag back if you still have concerns, you do not have the right to tell me not to remove it, unless you can provide me with a policy saying that the disputer has the sole right to remove the tag.

Since you are currently online, I will wait 24 hours you to address my thorough debunking of your concerns, and then I will remove it again. If you still have concerns, you are free to put it back, however, failure to readdress those conerns will lead me to consider invoking WP:IAR to no longer stick with WP:AGF. If you actually dispute the situation, you will back it up. — trlkly 10:29, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied to your questions at File talk:1 eurocent malta.png. The tag states that it may be removed when concerns have been addressed, but you did not address them, just removed the tag (you did even not provide an edit summary). --Eleassar ^{my talk} 10:35, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was in the middle of writing those concerns when you responded. I will admit that I should have done those actions in reverse order--however, it has never been a problem before. I withdraw my previous comment on this page. I unfortunately already violated WP:AGF by accident, taking your response incorrectly, and, for that, I apologize. — trlkly 10:58, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, have a nice editing. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 11:00, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've retagged the image. Please, see Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 61#Euro coins. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 13:43, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not appreciate you telling me the dispute was closed while still going around asking questions about it. If you still were unsure, you should have left the tag up. I'm having to expend a lot or energy on trying to save an image I did not originally upload, and it would have at least been nice to have done it all at once. — trlkly 14:43, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Egyptian Boy Scouts Association.png

Thank you so much, you did a lot of hard work! Can you also png the white area inside the scroll?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 13:29, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be glad to. It took me to figure out what you meant, I think I got it now. I had misinterpreted what was the background and what was the foreground. Is this better? — trlkly 14:48, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, sorry it took me so long to get back with you, it's great!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 01:11, 14 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Hillsong - God is in the House.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Hillsong - God is in the House.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I included one. But, for some reason, uploads from the plain form seem to sometimes drop the Summary. It happened to me twice before today. I guess I just didn't catch this one. — trlkly 23:29, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Fran Drescher Show logo.jpg

I'm curious about your choice to replace File:The Fran Drescher Show logo.jpg with another. Is it because my version was in JPG and yours has a transparent background? I ask because my version, despite its format, appears to be higher quality with smoother lines. It doesn't matter. So what if mine is deleted, by seeing the FfD peaked my curiosity. I don't care whether you reply on my page or here. — CobraWiki ^{( jabber | stuff )} 00:56, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the reason was because it is a JPEG. If you'll scroll down the page, you'll notice a dialog that says "This image was uploaded in a format such as GIF or JPEG and therefore has lost its quality. It is more suited to the PNG format, which supports full color support, lossless compression and transparency." So I converted the image to PNG. I do it all the time.

It was not my intention to make the lines more jagged. That sometimes happens with the way I fix these problems, but I didn't notice it this time. It's sometimes hard to strike that balance between blurry and jaggy. I'll see if I can fix it. — trlkly 01:06, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the deal is. When I scale down the original source, I get a jaggier image than you did. I tried blurring it to fix it, but that didn't work either. So I finally just gave up and started with your JPEG, converting it directly.

Do you happen to remember what program you used to reduce the size of the image? And if you had to choose a scaling method, which one did you choose? I agree your image looked better. — trlkly 01:47, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember what program I used, but I always use biliniar or bicubic resampling for resizing images. I stayed with the same format as the original image (JPG) because resizing an image causes a loss of quality anyway and saved the file as close ot lossless as I could. Looking at your image, you MIGHT have used pixel-to-pixel resampling which is a big no-no for quality but helpful in making the creation of transparent backgrounds much easier. I also stayed with JPG because I had no need to remove the background. The more complicated the image's edges, the harder it is to convert to a proper transparency without damaging the image. — CobraWiki ^{( jabber | stuff )} 18:18, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you'd have preserved the quality better if you'd have saved as PNG, as PNG is inherently lossless. I understand what you mean about the background being difficult to remove, but that is typically what they want here. Fortunately, they want you to remove any JPEG artifacts, which technically "damages" the image anyways. (See Wikipedia:HRCS.) As long as it looks right, it's okay. Does mine look right now?

I actually used bicubic as well. I don't know what the issue was. Maybe the latest GIMP is not actually using bicubic when I tell it to. I'd been thinking the problem was just my new monitor, as everything is sharper on it. I've taken to blurring the image before reducing it from now on. — trlkly 18:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) So here's my proposal. Per the section below, both images need to be moved to Wikimedia Commons. Since Commons prefers having the highest resolution possible, we'll replace the JPEG with the full sized version (since it was a originally a JPEG). The PNG will stay the same size, but will only be uploaded after you agree that I have fixed it so that it is a good quality image. That way, we'll be sure the image in the article is still high quality, rather than relying on Wikimedia to scale it for us.

What do you think? — trlkly 19:41, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your new version looks much better. Again, none of this is a big deal to me. It was more a curiosity given the lower quality of your first image. Now that it has been satisfied, do whatever you want. Take care. — CobraWiki ^{( jabber | stuff )} 22:31, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Fran Drescher Show logo.jpg and commons

(from Sfan00 IMG's talk page)

I was surprised to see you mark that image as needing to go to commons, as it is marked as needing to be in the PNG format. I've always assumed that we were supposed to convert the file first, and then upload it to commons. I note that you did not mark my conversion (File:The Fran Drescher (Tawk) Show logo.png) as being commons material.

So I'm just getting clarification here: do you think both images (JPG and PNG) should go to commons, just the JPEG, or just the PNG? And do you agree that we should probably use the full sized image at commons?— trlkly 19:00, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Jpeg was free, the converted version wasn't tagged for Commons, because it still has an (incorrect NFUR) on it. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:03, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I can understand that. I've now replaced the NFUR. Should both files be uploaded to Commons, or just one? You didn't answer that part of my question. — trlkly 19:13, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Both should be moved. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:17, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Both should be uploaded to Commons (I rarely use Commons due to some past logo issues hence originally uploading the file to en.WP) but as free content both would be better served under the original size. — CobraWiki ^{( jabber | stuff )} 22:37, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:OnLive logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:OnLive logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 02:03, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Solace 13 album cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Solace 13 album cover.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 06:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Media Viewer

I've replied to you on mw.org.

Happy editing to you :) Keegan (WMF) (talk) 04:55, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Colorado eagles.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Colorado eagles.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Malpass⁹₃! (what I've been ^up to/_drop me a ^___) 22:23, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Art is... The Permanent Revolution (2012).png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Art is... The Permanent Revolution (2012).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:38, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Smile Train.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Smile Train.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fma12 (talk) 14:32, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Range logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Range logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:XVII Asiad mascots.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:XVII Asiad mascots.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:35, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Wii Karaoke U logotype.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wii Karaoke U logotype.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:27, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Deportes Telemundo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Deportes Telemundo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 21:14, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:P.A.O.K. B.C. logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:P.A.O.K. B.C. logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:25, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Point-of-Rental company logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Point-of-Rental company logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:43, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You do beautiful work!

Do you take requests?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:M&M mascots.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:M&M mascots.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:59, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Already has a better image. I also deleted my Ms. Brown image. — trlkly 23:11, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Point-of-Rental company logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Point-of-Rental company logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:American Indian College Fund logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:American Indian College Fund logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:02, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Atlantic League logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Atlantic League logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NAACP logo

This logo might very well be to old for any copyright protection. Even if not, I don't think it's more detailed than https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Best_Western_logo.svg#mw-jump-to-license which is also unprotected. --2003:CD:7BC0:D800:E546:162A:A75A:FC3D (talk) 08:36, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The age is not why that logo is a free image. It's just text, with some simple shapes to make a W. It's too simple to copyright. That's what {{PD-textlogo}} is about. Age is irrelevant.

The fancy drawing of the scale and book in the NAACP logo is too complicated to work under that. And the NAACP.org website specifically claims copyright on everything. So we're stuck with using {{non-free logo}}

The image was going to be replaced anyways, anyways, as it was a JPEG with a white background. We prefer PNGs with a transparent background for stuff like that. Only photos use JPEGs. See WP:IUP#FORMAT for more information.

— trlkly 08:48, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Against Malaria Foundation.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Against Malaria Foundation.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:23, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Trlkly. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Public Service Association of NSW logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Public Service Association of NSW logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Public Service Association of NSW logo.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Public Service Association of NSW logo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:21, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Public Service Association of NSW logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Public Service Association of NSW logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:02, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Xinjiang Flying Tigers logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Xinjiang Flying Tigers logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:24, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ArmyTimes Cover.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ArmyTimes Cover.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Bondi Raptors logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bondi Raptors logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Smooth Radio logo.svg

?

Thanks for uploading File:Smooth Radio logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 20:34, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:NAACP logo 2010.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:NAACP logo 2010.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:39, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hocoma logo.svg

?

Thanks for uploading File:Hocoma logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:22, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Trlkly. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ArtRage Maccaw screen capture (37.5%).png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ArtRage Maccaw screen capture (37.5%).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:JeanGreyPhoenix.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:JeanGreyPhoenix.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:32, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:UKIP logo (2017).png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:UKIP logo (2017).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — kashmīrī ^TALK 22:33, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Liberty University seal.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Liberty University seal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Corky 20:00, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Obermeyer logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Obermeyer logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:45, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Lingo logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lingo logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:31, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Angelicum College.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Angelicum College.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:07, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:HKS Ruch Zdzieszowice logo.svg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:07, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Birthday Party cover.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:17, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Birthday Party cover.jpg

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:07, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:AS Fortior logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:AS Fortior logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:03, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:JeanGreyPhoenix.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:JeanGreyPhoenix.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NeoBatfreak 07:09, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Won't purge

Template:Won't purge has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 20:03, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Kidscape logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kidscape logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:12, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Goji's Frozen Yogurt logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Goji's Frozen Yogurt logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:26, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Trlkly. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tran Dai Nghia High School logo.png

The source of that file is from a facebook page, on top of that the page itself is owned by an consultation company using the school's name without any affiliation to the entity. The old file which you want to delete comes from the official page, even if it doesn't look good, it should be the image used on wikipedia. --Squall282 (talk) 02:21, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Tran Dai Nghia High School logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tran Dai Nghia High School logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:39, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Brown–Forman logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Brown–Forman logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:27, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Bradford City WFC logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Bradford City WFC logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:44, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:PlanetHPC logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PlanetHPC logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:24, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Wheeling Jesuit University seal.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wheeling Jesuit University seal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:07, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:SLS Las Vegas logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SLS Las Vegas logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:41, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:C.D. Santa Clara logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:C.D. Santa Clara logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:27, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Montreal-Est Rangers.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Montreal-Est Rangers.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:38, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]