User talk:Jcuk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:

• Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try Wikipedia:How to edit a page.
• To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use ~~~~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes).
• You can experiment in the test area.
• You can get help at the Help Desk
• Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Civility, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
• If you made IP edits before creating a user account, you can attribute your IP edits to your account at Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit.

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop a note at Wikipedia:New user log.

-- Utcursch | Talk to me

Contents 1 Hey 2 Image uploading 3 Playaway 4 Populations 5 Inclusionist 6 Disambiguations 7 Google test 8 Verifiability 9 Merry Christmas!! 10 Attempt to remove all Jewish lists 11 Sharon Tendler/Cindy the Dolphin 12 Cleanup Tag 13 Tupton 14 AfD Carry On Please 15 Come and vote your mind 16 Rebecca J. Nelson 17 Deletion vote 18 Wikilinking dates 19 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ibat 20 AfD 21 Sexual Victimization of Native American Women 22 Regarding Robert Angleton 23 Image copyright problem with Image:Jclary.jpg 24 Image Tagging for Image:Bresslaw.jpg 25 Image Tagging Image:Hobcarts.jpg 26 SLF 27 Gay rights in Chad 28 Katelyn Faber 29 Image Tagging Image:Slfdolph.gif 30 Wikipedia:Wikiethics 31 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faculdade de Engenharia Elétrica e da Computação da Universidade Estadual de Campinas 32 Notability of Judges 33 Lists 34 List of hardcore punk bands cleanup 35 Statutory Instruments 36 Deleting Camp Avoda again 37 Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion 38 Unblock 39 Unspecified source for Image:RAFMastAircrew.jpg 40 Unspecified source for Image:RAFwo.jpg 41 List of beat 'em ups undeletion request 42 Image:Slfcurrentofficial.jpg 43 Image:Slfnow.jpg 44 Image dispute 45 Countess Charlotte of Rosenborg 46 Rosenborgs

[edit] Hey

Hey. In general people tend to be given articles by their birth name and not an alias unless that is all they're known by. On Google I got as many hits for Brian "Dolphin" Taylor as Brian Taylor, and so thats where I moved it to.

An article needing wikified is one that isn't in the style of other Wikipedia articles. By reading some other articles you can probably see how to cleanup the article to Wikipedia standard, and can then remove the tag. Hedley 18:20, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image uploading

There are instructions at Wikipedia:Uploading_images, and the upload page is at Special:Upload -- reachable from the "Upload file" link in the "toolbox" in your left-hand sidebar (it might be at the top of the page if you have switched to a non-default skin).

Be certain about the copyright status of the image you are uploading. If you took it yourself, there's no problem -- in fact, if you took it yourself, you should consider uploading it to Wikimedia Commons instead. Doing so makes it available for all Wikimedia projects in all languages, and you can link to it from a WP article using the normal syntax. By uploading it (either locally or at Commons), you are agreeing to license the image under the GNU FDL, which means that anyone can copy and reuse it for any purpose, including commercial purposes, provided they credit you and don't try to claim copyright on the image themselves.

If you got the image from elsewhere, ask me more and I'll help you determine whether it's usable by Wikipedia, and if so what image copyright tag should be added. Thanks for asking! — Catherine\^talk 19:54, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Playaway

Hi there. Playaway may be the title on the BBC website, but looking at the 1975 and 1984 titles on TV Ark ([1]) it's spelt 'Play Away'. So, I'm not sure what's going on with the BBC website.... BillyH 21:30, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Populations

It's not at all obvious. If you go to [2] then you get an interface where you can download Lots of spreadsheets containing stats. Morwen - Talk 07:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Inclusionist

You may need to create an account on the Meta-Wikimedia site, where the AIW is. --King of All the Franks 01:16, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I can sympathize. --King of All the Franks 10:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguations

Hi. I prefer to use Name, District if Name, County isn't good enough, not Name, Random Town, because you can figure out the right District to use from a map, at least. Morwen - Talk 12:02, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm referring to Scotton, Harrogate which you moved to Scotton, Knaresborough - the (informal) convention has been to use local government districts rather than the post town in the name. Keeps everything consistent - because the districts are subdivisions of the counties we use, whereas the post towns cross county boundaries. Morwen - Talk 12:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Google test

Could you be a little more careful in your application of the Google test on AFD in the future? I noticed you voted to keep an article because of 500+ Google hits, when it turned out it had less than a hundred non-duplicate hits.

Make sure the number isn't being overinflated by repeated mentions on a single site by clicking ahead to page 10 or so, and looking at the actual number instead of the initial estimate. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:59, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Verifiability

I've noticed that on many of your AfD votes, you state that "such and such exists and is verifiable," which is your reason for keeping. I can respect that, but are you aware of the standard of verifiability? Please read WP:V (policy) and WP:RS (guideline) for what the standards of verifiability are. Just because something exists and is verifiable by word of mouth or personal knowledge does not mean it meets the standards that Wikipedia requires. Regards, howcheng {chat} 16:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Google hits in and of themselves do not constitute verification. If all the hits are personal blogs or free web sites or whatever, that doesn't count. WP:RS defines what "reliable sources" are, although that's only a guideline because for more obscure yet encyclopedic topics you won't be able to find mainstream sources. For example, my own web site is Google-able, but it has received no press or industry or any other coverage in any reputable publication, and therefore by Wikipedia standards is unverifiable. I realize you've only started to become involved in AfD discussions very recently, so you may have not seen some of the sockpuppet-fests we get regularly, but what we try to explain to newbies (and I'm not trying to say that you're a sockpuppet or use sockpuppets or anything like that, but you are an AfD newbie) is that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and therefore by definition is a tertiary source. It does not make news (a la primary sources), it does not report news (a la secondary sources), but instead reports on what others have deemed to be newsworthy -- this is spelled more in WP:NOT: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. It may not be a paper encyclopedia and thus not subject to size limitations, but that doesn't mean we have articles on everything under the sun just because they exist. We must discriminate (in the sense of "discriminating tastes," not "racial discrimination") to determine what stays and what goes. Now the line that gets drawn is subject to debate and thus you have inclusionists and deletionists, but the thing that nobody argues about is verification because it's policy and it's adequately spelled out. I encourage you to read through these policies carefully, and maybe even lurk a bit more in AfD. You'll find that some people are out to delete almost everything, but you'll also find that the majority of participants apply the standards which have been accepted by general consensus. In doing so, you should get an idea of what the consensus is and if you so choose, push it more towards the inclusionist stance, but please don't go throwing around the word "verifiable" when you're not using it as it is understood on Wikipedia. Best regards, howcheng {chat} 17:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merry Christmas!!

[edit] Attempt to remove all Jewish lists

Hi. An attempt is being made to force the deletion of all Jewish lists from Wikipedia. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Centralized_discussion/Lists_by_religion-ethnicity_and_profession#Proposed_amendment:_remove_most_Jewish-related_lists and my compromise proposals at Wikipedia_talk:Centralized_discussion/Lists_by_religion-ethnicity_and_profession#Proposal_to_make_Jewish_lists_and_categories_historical_only. Thanks Arniep 10:04, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sharon Tendler/Cindy the Dolphin

Hi, I noticed that you took part in the previous AFD on Cindy the Dolphin. Well the article is now up for deletion again. I thought you might like to vote. Afd Cindy the Dolphin. Thanks Englishrose 23:07, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup Tag

Cripes, when I look back at it, probably not so much the cleanup, its the catneeded issue when I am going for my random page mania :) I suppose, (a) as long as most of the links are ok, it has a category, there was no real need for it afterall. Apologies! Please remove it! SatuSuro 00:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC) aka vcxlor

[edit] Tupton

Please don't remove the Articles for Deletion notice from the top of articles when they are still under consideration by the community. This is considered vandalism. Many thanks. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 23:14, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD Carry On Please

Are you aware of any reason why the above AfD (which I think you bought forward?) would be locked? Have just been trying to vote on it and cant get it... Cheers Jcuk 18:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, yes I nominated it. I just checked and it doesn't appear to be locked, very strange. --Muchness 18:45, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Come and vote your mind

Dear Christian friend,

I saw you on the list of Christian Wikipedians and wanted to let you know about something. The other day, someone nominated 12 Christian biography entries for deletion! They include a Christian university list of people (not unlike 68 other lists like it)[3], presidents of universities, and authors of many books.

Since that time, people have been voting. Please take this message as a call to vote; not a call to vote a certain way. I respect you and your ability to come, read the entry, and make a wise decision. In other words, I’m not vote stacking or campaigning; simply letting you know something that you’d probably like to know.

By the way, my friend recently started an organization called Wiki4Christ. If you’d like to join a network of Christians with a purpose on Wikipedia, please see the site!

Below are some of the links that need attention. Thanks for your consideration.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Louisiana_Baptist_University_people_%28second_nomination%29

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Neal_Weaver

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jimmy_DeYoung

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/James_Combs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Robert_Morey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daniel_Dorim_Kim

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/J._Otis_Ledbetter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ron_Moseley

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mike_Randall

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Charles_Pack

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mal_Couch

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Thomas_Ice

God bless you, Wiggins2 07:07, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rebecca J. Nelson

I've unearthed a bit more information about this person, you may want to change your vote on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rebecca_J._Nelson. Thanks. Crypticfirefly 05:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion vote

Greetings, Jcuk!
In the VFD on Arthur Stanley Katz you supported my position to preserve the article, which was on a candidate for Congress in Ohio. Several of the candidates whose articles were deleted I put on a special "minor candidates" page, which is now up for deletion as well. I wonder if you would offer your comments there. It is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ohio second congressional district other candidates. PedanticallySpeaking 17:10, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikilinking dates

Hi. Please don't wikilink months (e.g., September) unless the month is significant beyond being a date. Years should not be wikilinked excessively either. Dates, however, should be wikilinked to allow for the date to be displayed as defined in the user's preferences. See Wikipedia:Dates#Date formatting. Thanks. --Whouk (talk) 14:46, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ibat

Hi, I've updated this AfD with some info, and am notifying everyone who has participated in the discussion so far. I'm doing this because I think some users have misunderstood what Ibat is. Please read my comments at the AfD, and if you wish, update your comments. Thanks! Mindmatrix 00:32, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD

Hi Jcuk, Did you make these edits to the AfD for Shortwave transmitter Jülich? Someone with IP 80.177.152.156 signed your name. Just curious. --Fang Aili 16:36, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sexual Victimization of Native American Women

You voted to keep this article. It is still a very bad article. Since you obviously thought that it has merit, maybe you would be interested in bringing it in line with Wikipedia policy. If you are unwilling or unable to fix this article, maybe you should consider not voting to keep articles like this in future AfD votes. BrianGCrawfordMA 20:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Robert Angleton

Regarding Robert Angleton, I got it all from the book "Death in Texas" by Carlton Smith. WhisperToMe 03:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Jclary.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jclary.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have questions about copyright tagging of images, post on Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags or User talk:Carnildo/images. 06:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging for Image:Bresslaw.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bresslaw.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 10:21, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:Hobcarts.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Hobcarts.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 15:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SLF

Hi. I can't remember exactly what I had in mind when I added the tag. Looking at it now though, I think it need an expansion of the introduction for definate (this can be a brief summary of the other subsections of the article, if I understand the Manual of Style correctly), an infobox as with other artists/groups, and a new subsection on what they're currently doing (both individually and as a group). I think the sections need re-ordering and maybe sub'ed themselves - the descriptions of the albums put under a subsection maybe. These are just suggestions of course! I'd have a look at some of the good articles like The Beatles maybe and try to keep roughly consistant with it. Hope my suggestions are of help anyway, and have fun editing it. :) --Mal 01:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gay rights in Chad

If, as you say on your user page, you honestly believe that 99.999999999% of articles are worth keeping and/or expanding or at the VERY worst merging, then how could you vote[4] for downright deletion of the article Gay rights in Chad? We're not quite yet at 66666666667 articles in Wikipedia. Just curious. Lambiam 01:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I must respectfully disagree that your explanation was very clear, but that was not my point. Apparently you felt that there was at least one article not worth keeping. I was not enquiring after your reasons, but merely pointing out a contradiction or inconsistency between your vote and your stated honest belief. Lambiam 01:33, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Katelyn Faber

Could you weigh in at the bottom of the Talk Page for Katelyn Faber regarding the inclusion of an image of her? User:Tufflaw, who unsuccessfully tried to have the entire article deleted back in December 2005 insists on censoring/deleting it for extremely specious reasons, and I've been asked to gather a consensus. Please read the bottom two sections of that page. Thanks. Nightscream 19:02, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I saw your question. The image is in the last version of the article. --FloNight ^talk 21:35, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:Slfdolph.gif

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Slfdolph.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 23:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Wikiethics

Hi,

We started a proposal Wikipedia:Wikiethics to state the existing policies coherently and make suggestions on improving the editorial standards in Wiki. I thought you might be interested in contributing to that proposal.

Unfortunately, a pro-porn and pro-offense lobby is trying to make this proposal a failure. They unilaterally started an approval poll although almost no one including me believe that it is time for a vote, simply because the policy is not ready. It is not even written completely.

Editors who thinks that the policy needs to be improved rather than killed by an unfair poll at the beginning of the proposal, started another poll ('Do we really need a poll at this stage?') at the same time. The poll is vandalized for a while but it is stable now. A NO vote on this ('Do we really need a poll now?') poll will strengthen the position of the editors who are willing to improve the ethics policy further.

If you have concerns about the ethics and editorial standards in Wiki, please visit the page Wikipedia:Wikiethics with your suggestions on the policy. We have two subpages: Arguments and Sections. You might want to consider reviewing these pages as well...

Thanks in advance. Resid Gulerdem 01:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faculdade de Engenharia Elétrica e da Computação da Universidade Estadual de Campinas

Regarding your comment there, It is part of Wikipedia policy that articles that are copied and pasted from another Wikipedia without translation can be speedily deleted in order to discourage the practice. I don't remember where I saw that policy, but I know it's there... I think that's what they were talking about. Grandmasterka 07:49, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of Judges

I posted this here as well as on the AfD page just for the benefit of all who are wondering the same thing.

I don't think there is a set policy on judges. State judges can be notable and Federal judges can be obscure. But your state district court judge is going to be more likely to have your run-of-the-mill cases like car theft, assault and the occasional murder. Sometimes state judges like Lance Ito become quite notable because of a notable trial, OJ Simpson for instance. A Federal judge requires you to get a Presidential appointment, which can end up becoming political, and you also get a shot at constitutional issues. If someone could point out a case with major implications that Judge Rice presided over, that would change my opinion. So as in everything here at Wikipedia, it's very subjective, for me I like a rule of thumb. Montco 02:21, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lists

• Jcuk, I have never and will never suggest that something should be deleted because it is a list. However, WP articles should not be bare lists of links - you proved my point when you cited List of Premier League stadiums, a great list, look at all the context that provides! The nominated list of Australian basketball venues contravenes WP:NOT which is an official policy. A list like this should either be included in a wider article about basketball in Aus, or fleshed out like the LoPLs, something a slew of keep voters, including several who appear to be familiar with the topic have been unable or unwilling to do, or even make their keep votes conditional upon. Inclusionism is peachy, but it is still superceded by official policy. Nice1, Deizio 14:00, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

• Good work that man, nom happily withdrawn. Deizio 21:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of hardcore punk bands cleanup

I've been cleaning up some lists. I checked every article linked from List of hardcore punk bands, and made sure they were in Category:Hardcore punk groups. (About 60% were; the rest have been fixed.) Then I deleted the list info in List of hardcore punk bands. What do you think?

I'm trying to figure out how to automate more of Wikipedia, and this is a start. --John Nagle 19:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Statutory Instruments

Hi. I notice that you have previously voted or commented on the proposal to delete the List of Statutory Instruments of the United Kingdom, 1996 page. The debate about the delete proposal ended with no consensus. This is just to let you know that I have started a discussion on how to go forward from here. I am currently trying to define what the problems with the page are so that we can try to find a fix for them that stops short of outright deletion. If you wish to take part in the discussion, the new debate can be found here. Thank you. Road Wizard 00:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting Camp Avoda again

Hi, because of your past interest in this, you may want to see the new vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Avoda (2nd nomination), best wishes, IZAK 14:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion

Hello! I noticed that you have been a contributor to articles on Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. You may be interested in checking out a new WikiProject - WikiProject Anglicanism. Please consider signing up and participating in this collaborative effort to improve and expand Anglican-related articles! Cheers! Fishhead64 23:29, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unblock

I strongly suspect I'll be talking to myself, but what the hell here goes! I wish to protest strongly at being A>Blocked and B> not being given the slightest sniff of a warning!! I have done NOTHING against wiki policy, and request my block is lifted as soon as is humanely possible.

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:RAFMastAircrew.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:RAFMastAircrew.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —The preceding signed comment was added by Angr (talk • contribs). 08:16, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:RAFwo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:RAFwo.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —The preceding signed comment was added by Angr (talk • contribs). 08:19, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of beat 'em ups undeletion request

I have nominated List of beat 'em ups to be undeleted, under the reasoning that it is not redundant to the category; it contains many games which are not covered by the category, and may never be able to be covered by it. In addition, the list can do more than the category. It can put date, developer, release date, system, et al., useful especially for articles that would be difficult to create an article for. I hope that you will vote on this and hopefully support its undeletion, on the basis that it does something that makes it not redundant to the category. [5] - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Slfcurrentofficial.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Slfcurrentofficial.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 15:59, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Slfnow.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Slfnow.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 16:02, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image dispute

Please calm down. If you have a convincing argument why that image cannot be replaced, then it won't be deleted. Leaving angry, breathless messages on my talk page won't really have an effect on the decision one way or the other, no matter how many exclamation points you use. —Chowbok ☠ 18:39, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Simply saying they gave "permission" is too vague. What permission did they give you, specifically? Can anybody reproduce and edit the photo for any reason, even for profit? If not, then it's not good enough. —Chowbok ☠ 18:53, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Countess Charlotte of Rosenborg

I moved the article primarily because it didn't have the comma in there in the first place (Charlotte Countess of Rosenborg, instead of Charlotte, Countess of Rosenborg) and also I think some people might think it's some sort of royal courtesey, like Letizia, Princess of Asturias or Mathilde, Duchess of Brabant. Morhange 21:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Greetings Jcuk.

One of the articles you've created contained a misspelled name. "Ulrik" is a Danish name which can only be spelled in one way, so I've taken the liberty of moving the relevant article to Count Ulrik of Rosenborg. Hope you don't mind. Happy editing. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 21:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi again.

I don't know much about the subject but da:Greve af Rosenborg had more information. Whenever a Danish royal married a commoner (or without the consent of the monarch) he / she lost all claims to the throne. This practice was last continued during the reign of King Christian X. A total of seven royals left the royal family this way and six of them had issue. I'll translate the relevant part of the page:

• Sons of Prince Valdemar:
  • Prince Aage. Son of Prince Valdemar (who was a son of Christian IX). Married Mathilde di Bergolo (1914). Issue. Male line extinct 1995.
  • Prince Erik. Son of Prince Valdemar (see above). Married Lois Frances Booth (1924). Issue.
  • Prince Viggo. Son of Prince Valdemar. Married Eleanor Margaret Green (1924). No issue.

• Prince Flemming. Son of Prince Axel who was a son of Prince Valdemar. Married Ruth Nielsen (1949). Issue.
• Prince Oluf. Son of Prince Harald who has a son of Frederick VIII. Married Dorrit Puggaard-Müller (1948). Issue.
• Sons of Prince Knud
  • Prince Ingolf. Son of Prince Knud (Frederick IX's younger brother). Marrid Inge Terney (1968). Issue. Second marriage: Countess Sussie of Rosenborg (I don't know her maiden name). He is first cousin to the Queen.
  • Prince Christian. Son of Prince Knud (mentioned before). Married Anne Dorte Maltoft-Nielsen (1971). Issue. First cousin to the Queen.

Note that Prince Knud also fathered a daughter, Princess Elisabeth. Since she never married, she retains her place in the line of succession.

Hope this helps a bit. It is possible that several of these persons might already have articles. Perhaps if you pick one of the Danish monarchs and follow the list of issue in the infobox? Regards. Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 23:34, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rosenborgs

All of these articles mention the current place in the line of British succession of their subject. And they will all need to be changed by the end of the month. Cia-Rosemarie Roderburg, Count Alexander-Wilhelm Bernadotte and Prince Pieter-Christiaan of Orange-Nassau are all expecting children in November. Bettina Haug is expecting in December. Add that to the spring births of the Prince of Asturias, Prince of Orange and Crown Prince of Denmark, and there will have to be constant updating on those articles. Morhange 14:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)