![]() |
This is an archive of discussions from January to December 2010. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on my main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.
|
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Chronology of the Doctor Who universe. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chronology of the Doctor Who universe. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:05, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're previously involved in bid process for hosting Wikimania in Toronto. Right now we're forming a bid team for Wikimania in 2011. Would you be interested? I know you're on the mailing list but I might have missed it due to too much noise. I apologize ahead of time if you have already indicate your will. OhanaUnitedTalk page 17:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A review to see if Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria has started, and has been put on hold. Suggestions for improvement are at Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom/GA2, and are mainly to do with coverage and neutrality, and building the lead section. Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is one of our most high profile and popular articles, attracting an average of over 11,000 readers every day. You have made more than 30 edits to the article, and so you might be interested in helping to make the improvements needed to get it listed as a Good Article. SilkTork *YES! 12:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because you have participated in one of the previous move requests for the Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom article, I invite you to take part in the latest move request for that article. Thank you. --~Knowzilla (Talk) 09:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments there for you. –xenotalk 20:35, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom/Article title. DrKiernan (talk) 09:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})[reply]
Please could you comment on the request at Template talk:WikiProject Canada#Cities? Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:39, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note, the page should not have been deleted - because it contained history, both on the article and the talk page, and that's why it already had the Wikiproject Canada banner on it. Once the article got redirected the logical thing to do would be change the assessment to display what the page is: a redirect; a redirect with an important title and discussions on the talk page.
The point isn't to assess redirects or to improve them in any way, the point is that if a talk page has prior history it should not be deleted but rather categorized for tracking purposes. Especially if it's a merged article.. templates such as {{mergedto}} and {{copied}} exist just for the purpose of placing on the redirect's talk page, it's useful for proper attribution and compliance with licensing. The Wikiproject Canada or any other banner can be removed, but if the redirect is still an important article title and common search term the better thing to do would be to categorize it as Redirect-Class or NA-class. But it definitely should not be deleted if there's a past history of relevant discussions on the talk page of the redirect, regardless of any wikiproject banner that may be on the page. Anyways, you probably know all this anyway, hope I made sense though. -- Ϫ 01:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Er, uh, yes... that's what happens when you make a simple change, like "prototype" to "experimental", without considering the rest of the sentence... -- tariqabjotu 22:24, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Arctic.gnome. Argolin recently has been putting some hard work into cleanup and categorization of Canadian music articles, and I've been offering the occasional guidance. Your name came up in a discussion we were having about importance ratings of articles, and we would both be interested in your input, if you have a moment: User talk:Argolin#Juno Awards by year. Thanks much, Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 13:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Arctic Gnome. I'm looking to get this template updated Template:WikiProject Canada? Are you responsible for it? It is locked and rightly so. I really can't seem to find the owner of the template. I may be wrong but the creator of the page, is not necessarily the owner of the template?. Also, I tried exploring Category:Wikipedia template categories. Looking at that category, I really don't feel that dumb for asking who is responsible for it. WP Big, WP too big? Thanks for your time. Argolin (talk) 06:18, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Then I shall blame User:SineBot for being slow :p OrangeDog (τ • ε) 16:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I normally wouldn't have semi'd it, but according to the article's talk page, there has been a two-month long dispute (if not longer) about whether the Greek letters should be in the article. That, combined with what appeared to be IP hopping, made me think semi'ing was best. Blueboy96 22:04, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I love it. Falcon8765 (talk) 00:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for uploading File:WHDraper.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that you are a part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Governments of Canada and I have a proposal to turn that Wikiproject into Wikiproject:Canadian Politics. I would love to here your thoughts. The proposal disccusion is here Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Canadian Politics. --Everyone Dies In the End (talk) 04:36, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Arctic.gnome, per your comment in the edit summary for Category:Old-time musicians. You got it in one! I assigned a low importance as a reminder or a to-do. I would have perferred ???, but you've got to work with what you have. I guess my next step is to contact the WikiProject Roots music before mucking about with categories? Argolin (talk) 05:25, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find info about another place in Canada with this name in the StatsCan SGC, but I did find this, which suggests that a tourist location in Manitoba with that name also exists. I'm not sure whether that would merit inclusion in Wikipedia though. Mindmatrix 19:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that you changed the titles of several articles about regional municipalities and districts to use an en dash (e.g., Squamish–Lillooet Regional District). While I know that the use of an en dash is normally correct to indicate "to" or "and" in such situations, does the same principle apply when dealing with proper nouns? The website of the Squamish–Lillooet RD, for instance, uses a hyphen instead of an en dash (which may or may not be technically correct...), as do [2] and [3]. Thanks, -- Black Falcon (talk) 01:03, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Mr list guy! I don't know if you saw the reassessments the other day, but I went through the other Canadian classes (B, C, etc) and assigned the list items to list class. There's probably more hiding in these classes. I picked off all the easy ones with "List" in the article name. The music project has one oddball list class (without list in the article name) Discographies.
Anyway I have a list of 50ish new articles to assign to the music project. I'm rating/classifiying them all as unknown. These new articles have multiple issues to fix before I will assess and rate them. I know you have your hands full with the other projects. lol I also will help in your efforts. Have you ever used CatScan? It's a little finicky, but it works. Argolin (talk) 23:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've been moving them back to en dashes, and finally noticed your edit summary. I'll take it to WT:MOS for advice. It is very distracting to see the em dash, and it will keep being moved to en dashes on WP by editors who are following the MoS. Tony (talk) 11:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated List of science fiction film and television series by lengths, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of science fiction film and television series by lengths. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Claritas § 16:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Concerning this edit of yours I would like to comment that you added WPBS incorrectly. You forgot both |1=
before the templates and |blp=yes
that should be added due to the WPBiography with |living=yes
that exists in the talk page. Please be more careful in the future. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 22:09, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for uploading File:Antonio Barrette.jpg. 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:11, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Infobox regional government in Canada has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 04:38, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
For your excellent parody "One flag, two flag, red flag, blue flag" here. That totally made my day! +Angr 18:24, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply] |
InOpinion polling in the 41st Canadian federal election, you've amended much of the table to list date ranges rather than just the closing date of the poll. Previous elections have explicitly listed only that closing data as a "Date of Polling", and I've been trying to enforce that in each subsequent election's opinion poll page. Since the date range is already there in the cited poll release, I think changing the way this table reports date both makes the table harder to use and loses consistency with previous elections' tables. I think we should change it back to listing just the closing date (the final date of polling). Though I'm open to discussion. --Llewdor (talk) 20:13, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Jean Lesage.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 12:06, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Antonio Barrette.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 12:07, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Jean-Jacques Bertrand.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 12:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Robert Bourassa.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 12:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Daniel Johnson Jr.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}
, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 12:10, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Robert Bourassa.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 00:21, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Arctic, I was wondering if you could drop a few lines of discussion at Talk:University of Victoria regarding the bunnies and your and my recent edits to that section? An user recently requested that the article not refer to euthanizing the bunnies, based on its definition. But the term is specifically mentioned in the quoted article so it has its place I think. Ive originally made some notes and tried to address the user there, but i can see how my proposal may create redundancy. I've since redirected the wikification to animinal euthaniasia today after your edit. If you could give a few notes on your position about the users request as well, that would be super, thanks, sorry to bother. Ottawa4ever (talk) 12:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am writing from India. Here we always use the term Red Indians. Regards Jon Ascton (talk) 15:13, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering how come you stopped being active on the topics project? Nergaal (talk) 18:24, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey I was really fond of the page about sci fi shows by length, and was sad to see it taken down but understood the reasons for its removal. I noticed on the talk page you said you made it and was wondering if you still had those facts and figures bumping around somewhere on your hard drive, because honestly I am a huge nerd and while watching Babylon 5 I've been thinkin about how it stacks up run time wise with other shows but alas, I have no way of knowing. Cheers. bladeranger (talk) 04:50, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Thank you for your thoughtful note regarding "Sinecure".
I genuinely thought it was a typo.
I am in the UK and I thought we were the keen ones on "u" in Honour, honourable etc. Hence, since in the UK it is Honorary, I thought that nobody would have a "u" there, so I assumed it was just a typo.
But I can see the world is more complex than I imagined (e.g. http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=222313),
Best wishes,
Darrel Francis (talk) 16:48, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see you in the Skeena-Queen Charlotte Regional District history as the editor who added the current space between the two components, on either side of the long dash. I've changed a few of these back to hyphen only but this and certain others have redirects in the way. Why am I changing them back? Because on the one hand I'm getting tired of having to copy-paste article titles (and category names) when before I could just simply TYPE them, but it's ALSO because the regional districts themselves don't use them, they use only a hyphen, no space. It's like adding a circumflex or an accent grave to a word/name that doesn't have one IMO. Applying Wikipedia "punctuation" conventions without thought of whether or not it's usable or whether or not the subject itself uses them, it's not so hard to do; knee-jerk modifications of things just to fit wiki standards, or to look "p.c. cool", aren't always the right thing to do (really, they never are). e.g. on Sto:lo it's important to note the form with diacriticals on the 'o's is used by only one tribal council, not both, nor is it used by all the non-TC bands. The hyphen vs. dash falls inthe same league, even though it's not a diacritical; but it is the official style of the RDs, and in the same way that Elections BC uses only a hyphen in its compound names (vs the dash used by Elections Canada), Wikipedia should follow those conventions....not try to reinvent/impose them.Skookum1 (talk) 18:38, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[undent] Misunderstood your Chicago reference, needless to say. As for laws using it, that's not surprising; given Hansard uses it, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs uses it, BCGNIS uses it, BC Basemap uses it, MoF uses it, and Hansard uses it. Since you're in Victoria, it's far easier for you to go down to the Leg, ask at the information desk where the Public Affairs Bureau is, and see if you can find someone who might say whether or not there is a style guide; another suggested place to ask/look would be the Queen's Printer (now a privatized company but still publishing govenrment materials, including Hansard) and you could try at the Speaker's Office or Provincial Secretary. One of them will know where it is; it may be a spellchecker dictionary inbuilt via BC Systems by now, who knows. But it's pretty damned clear that BC style guides have been around a lot longer than digitized em-dashes.Skookum1 (talk) 08:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Paul Martin04small.jpg, 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. Kelly hi! 11:05, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]