User talk:Yesmissy

1

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheOriginalDiamondDiva.jpg}

Thank you for uploading Image:TheOriginalDiamondDiva.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:11, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:DiamondDiva.jpg}

Thank you for uploading Image:DiamondDiva.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:DiamondDiva.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:14, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Thedameofalldames.jpg)

⚠

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Polly (Parrot) 21:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shirley Bassey

Please do not revert the cleanup efforts of this article with no explanation. Its current version had many errors which did not adhere to Wikipedia style guidelines, and the WP:NPOV policy. There are also citation tags in the article which should not be removed without first providing a reliable source. Thank you. - eo (talk) 19:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop boldfacing text

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Shirley Bassey discography‎. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. - eo (talk) 18:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing, such as the edit you made to Shirley Bassey discography. If your vandalism continues, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. - eo (talk) 18:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Shshirlshirley.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Show preview"

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edit(s) to Shirley Bassey, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. - eo (talk) 19:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:5115GEK8C0L SS500 .jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:5115GEK8C0L SS500 .jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. Additionally, if you continue uploading bad images, you may be blocked from uploading. STBotI (talk) 19:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:5115GEK8C0L SS500 .jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:5115GEK8C0L SS500 .jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPOV, unsourced information

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Shirley Bassey. Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. - eo (talk) 16:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

stop removing sourced info and adding POV

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to Shirley Bassey, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. - eo (talk) 18:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you continue to add unsourced, POV statements to Bassey's article. For example the Wikipedia:Manual of Style determines that she should be referred to as Bassey - 'DSB' is infantile. Please desist from these fancruft based additions, which do little for Wikipedia's overall credibility as an encyclopedia; and not much more for Bassey's overall status. Kindly read Wikipedia:Five pillars before proceeding further - otherwise you are likely to find your edits removed without further recourse.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:28, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Film soundtracks with tracks by Shirley Bassey

Yesmissy - The information on songs recorded by Shirley Bassey and later reissued in film soundtracks do not warrant a seperate inclusion in the discography. There a simply to many and they do not warrant or add any information. The songs are often just background music etc. and were not originally composed for inclusion in the film. The list you added is NOT a Full list of soundtracks that feature Bassey songs....there are many hundreds.... The addition only makes the discography complex and messy, the discography also only lists compilations of special interest, eg. albums that charted or had new material included....again there are 1000s of compilation albums that do not warrant an inclusion. This is not a list of items or releases that include Shirley Bassey tracks. The discography section Original Soundtracks is purely for ORIGINAL songs written for and included on ORIGINAL soundtracks. I have removed the item (again). Please do not add them again. (See here below where the information can be added)

Where it belongs: Please add this sort of information to the song articles (see "History Repeating") or you can add the infromation on the Shirley Bassey article, in the section References in popular culture if is important enough for inclusion...Thank you. Dutchdean (talk) 12:31, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HI, just wanted to add that I agree with Dutchdean and Ericorbit. The Film Soundtrack section should be for songs that were written with the specific intention of being part of a movie soundtrack--"Goldfinger", "The Liquidator", etc., not every time a previously recorded Shirley Bassey song happens to be heard in the background. I would also add that I really don't think that this belongs in the main Shirley Bassey article under refs in popular culture, unless it made some kind of impact, or is notable in some other way. Refs in Popular Culture lists get too long as well. But the suggestion to include the information on the article for the song, if one exists, is a good one, and perhaps in the article on the movie, if one exists.--Nyctc7 (talk) 14:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yawn!

PS 1000's should be plural not possessive. Warrant not warrent. Oops, I just lost one of my sequins.

Please stop disrupting the Shirley Bassey article with misinformation and multiple spelling errors. We have been through this before; it is not fair if other editors have to constantly clean up or revert your edits. - eo (talk) 17:35, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At first I thought you were a good-faith contributor. But I see now that this is not the case; not only is your "sequin" comment in bad taste (at least), or a slur (at worst), by changing "5 months" to "5 years" then to "5 decades" in successive edits, when you surely know that the original figure is correct, one may reasonably conclude that you are acting with the sole intent to disrupt.--Nyctc7 (talk) 17:50, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your reaction confirms your true intentions....It seems that you only trying to cause problems. Your history also confirms this. Please do not use slurs or insults as a means of expressing your annoyance. You have been treated fairly, correctly and with respect. Please return the favour and stop the disruption. Dutchdean (talk) 18:47, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Shirley Bassey, you will be blocked from editing. You've had multiple warnings over a long period of time, and seem unwilling to engage in proper discussion with other editors. I will remind you for one last time on our policies of verifiability and using reliable sources. Any editor is entitled to remove unsourced content, especially in a biography such as this, and your replacing it *without* providing sources, even on the basis of your own knowledge, is not acceptable in an encyclopedic environment. It's up to you whether you wish to continue contributing here, but if you are such a keen fan of Dame Shirley you should easily have sources at your fingertips; and if you don't know how to cite them, WP:CITE should give you some clue. This is my offer, and you can take it or leave it, because you are on your last chance. Rodhull andemu 01:10, 30 October 2009 (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) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]