User talk:Green Tentacle

Welcome!

Hi Green Tentacle, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions to the coolest online encyclopedia I know of =). I sure hope you stick around; we're always in need of more people to create new articles and improve the ones we already have. You'll probably find it easiest to start with a tutorial of how the wikipedia works, and you can test stuff for yourself in the sandbox. When you're contributing, you'll probably find the manual of style to be helpful, and you'll also want to remember a couple important guidelines. First, write from a neutral point of view, second, be bold in editing pages, and third, use wikiquette. Those are probably the most important ones, and you can take a look at some others at the policies and guidelines page. You might also be interested in how to write a great article and possibly adding some images to your articles.

Be sure to get involved in the community – you can contact me at my talk page if you have any questions, and you can check out the village pump, where lots of wikipedians hang out and discuss things. If you're looking for something to do, check out the community portal. And whenever you ask a question or post something on a talk page, be sure to sign your name by typing ~~~~.

Again, welcome! It's great to have you. Happy editing! --Spangineer (háblame) 19:35, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

University of Chester

You're welcome! Noel (talk) 13:56, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

New Stadium

Drat, thanks for moving it and updating the Swansea article to fit. I meant to, and forgot all about it. Telsa 11:15, 16 August 2005 (UTC) (who still calls it the Morfa :))

Durham University ;)

Replied to your comments, and though I agree with much of them, I felt that the previous consensus reached on the talk page should have warranted further discussion before wholesale changes. If you feel that you want to change it again, I won't revert, as I accept that D.U. is probably going to become more common than u of d Robdurbar 21:08, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

League Table

Cheers for moving the League Table into the 2005/06 Premiership article - I had been meaning to look at that myself but couldn't think of how to build the table =) doktorb | words 21:49, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem! - Green Tentacle 13:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Derby Midland

"Remove untruth: it's still called 'Derby Midland Station' and was originally called that due to links with the North Midland Railway (nothing to do with Friargate)" I'm not clear when it became "Derby Midland". I assumed until Friargate was built it would have just been simply Derby. Chevin 09:29, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Replied on the article page. - Green Tentacle 13:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

DTT in the UK

Hi. I agree with the change you made to this article. It just didn't make sense to have Xtraview on the list (it was there before I edited it) and not the ITV News Channel.

On the other hand, the channel articles may have served to inform people - new to DTT - what these channels on the EPG were before they closed. I'll leave the choice to you. RobWill80 00:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I think it's probably best without the channels on the list, as it would be more confusing to new people to have closed channels on the list. They shouldn't be on the EPG for much longer. - Green Tentacle 00:33, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

English football league system

Hey, I'm curious why you reverted my edits on the above article. You gave the reason as "Revert as National league System page is a bit out-of-date". Could you point what in my edit was actually incorrect? Also... there was a lot of formating stuff (cutting down white space, making table rows alternately grey/white) which I think should've stayed, regardless of the content. Couldn't you have just removed any info you thought was wrong ,and left the formatting as it was? (I'm assuming you liked it, as you didn't give it as reason for your edit). I'm not wanting to start an edit war or anything so childish - I just want the article to be as good as possible :-) Tompw 00:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not sure if the National League System page is out-of-date any more. There was a time when it was quite out-of-date, but it seems to be better now (though I've not bothered checking all the leagues and divisions). Personally, I'm a fan of the virtical space and think that it makes the grid a lot easier to read (especially at lower levels). I'm also not too keen on it stating the promotion and relegation arrangements in the grid (that should be obvious from the way the divisions are physically positioned in the grid (though this becomes very hard from Level 10 and below) and, if necessary, explained in the text). Colour-coding-wise, I have no problem with the grey and white, but do you think it would make things clearer if it was colour-coded by league (so all the Football League divisions are one colour, the Conference divisions another)? - Green Tentacle 17:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I've checked leagues and divisions against the website linked to at the bottom, and they do seem to be correct. Consequently, I'm going to add them back in, because the extra info would improve the article. Colour-coding... I don't mind either way. Try out colouring by league, and see how it looks. As for the promotion/relegation stuff, the issue is more about what how many teams get promoted and how (playoff vs. automatic), rather than to which league. Tompw 23:29, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Now that you have done it, I have spotted quite a few inaccuracies, especially at Level 11. Frequently, for example, it will just name the league and not the division at that level (so it just says 'Wiltshire Football League', rather than 'Wiltshire Football League Premier Division'). A couple of the league names are also slightly out (it says 'West Cheshire Football League', rather than 'West Cheshire Amateur Football League'). Also, there's the issue of whether the division is called the 'First Division' or 'Division One' (we may as well get these things right). I also think it's important to have the sponsorship names listed at the lower levels (as they tend to be more dominant) - mimicking the Level 9 layout allows this easily.

One of the reasons I've never bothered adding all of these levels is because of the time it would take to sort out these niggles. Also, of course, everything's changing next season anyway. - Green Tentacle 23:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Reason for change?

Hello! I hope you are feeling fine. By the way, I would like to enquire about some of the recent edits you have made. Why did you change the title of the articles, Sussex County Football League Division 1 and Sussex County Football League Division 2 to the numbering format? I feel that the articles should be named as Sussex County Football League Division One and Two respectively. This is to produce consistency with the other league and division titles as well. If some divisions have the numbering format and the others have the wording format, there would be inconsistencies in the article titles. I am sure you do not want that to happen, right? If the official name of the leagues are in the numbering format, we should create a redirect page to the wording format. If you are not favourable to my opinion on this matter, we should then conduct a poll about this. Cheers! --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 17:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Good evening. I'm very well, thank you.

I changed the division names to use digits as they are the official names of the divisions (according to the official Sussex County Football League website) and it is Wikipedia policy to use official titles. Hence we see Grease 2 using digits, while Men in Black II uses Roman numerals. Consistency between the names of leagues/divisions doesn't come into it because, like films, there isn't any consistency between the names (see also Division One v First Division and League v Football League).

I do agree that there should be a redirect, but I feel Division One (and, indeed, First Division) should be the redirects, while Division 1 is home to the article. This therefore satisfies the need for consistancy (desirable), but more importantly adheres to the need for the official title to be used (essential). - Green Tentacle 21:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello! I realized that you gave an explanation for your reasons on your talk page after changing the titles to the wording system. You should have replied in my talk page. Nevertheless, the damage has already been done. Anyway, if the official title is Division 1 then, does this apply to ALL the divisions in the English football league system? If so, I do not mind changing ALL the titles to the number format. Or is only some of the divisions having this format, while others are having the wording format. If this is the case, then you are right. Some of the divisions having the official title in the wording format should be strictly adhered to while the other divisions having the number format should also be adhered into Wikipedia. Then, redirect pages must be created so that users do not accidentally create or unable to find these titles. Thus, your reasoning makes absolute sense to me and I acknowledge that I may have made a mistake in changing these titles too soon without consulting you. In any case, if you had replied to my talk page, this problem would not have happened. I am going to revert my own edits back to yours. I think that the discussion has now been closed and I would search for similar anomalies in the division official titles. If you feel like responding, do so in my talk page. Thanks! --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 20:20, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, just to let you know, I have just reverted my own edits back to yours. So there is no chance of an edit war happening! --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 20:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, thank you for clarifying this with me. Your reasons on this matter is sound and to the point. I guess we should start making the necessary changes on these leagues and divisions and create appropriate redirect pages for them. The important point to note is that this will be done on case-by-case basis. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 01:59, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

In my experience, what tends to be the version used in league communication changes (sometimes within a document) and there is no point in dogmatically changing "One" to "1", or "Division One" to "First Division". The Football League, for instance, in the days of four Divisions, sometimes referred to "Division 4", "Division IV" or "Fourth Division" interchangeably. I don't think how a division is titled on a website should be taken as the Gospel "official name". I have a Sussex County Football League Handbook from 1994-95 (yes I know its 12 years ago) where the divisions are referred to in words throughout - e.g. "Clubs in membership of Divisions One or Two shall be Full Member Clubs and all the other Clubs in membership of this league shall be Associate Member clubs". I've now got this page on my "watchlist" so please feel free to reply here if you wish. - fchd 06:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I accept that there are going to be inconsistencies, but football leagues are now much more aware of branding - even compared to twelve years ago (The Football League are certainly particular about what their divisions are called now). I think if we know that a league prefers one name over another, we should use it. For many minor football leagues, their website is their most readily-available publicity material and so is as good a source as any for the official titles (unless a Wikipedian does happen to have a copy of the current rules lying around). - Green Tentacle 13:27, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

North and South

I noticed that you added a comment about the division of the league cup into north and south sections some of the clubs in the northern section are actually located further south than some of the southern section clubs. Do you know if that's true for the forthcoming competition? I seem to remember last time Hereford were in the LDV cup they were in the northern section, despite being some 60 miles south of Shrewsbury, who were in the southern section.
 SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  00:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is true for this season's League Cup. Notts County are in the southern section, despite being located further north than both Derby County and Nottingham Forest (just), who are both in the northern section[1]. - Green Tentacle 17:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. What a fantastic link!  SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  17:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

DTT in the UK

Hi again. You asked why wait to put Virgin Radio in the list, and it's only fair that you know my reasoning: Film4 is using a LCN (and is receivable), and Virgin isn't yet. That's all. It's not that important, so I'll leave it as it is. RobWill80 18:31, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

What is wrong here?

Can you tell me why you have taken issue with some of my edits recently? Take your last revert of one of my edits: the small matter of the "www" in the Film4 article. The URL given in Channel 4's promotional material doesn't have the "www" attached either. Yet the article on Channel 4 has the whole address. I will assume that you do read that article, since you have edited it before. I will also assume you will be civil enough to give a response to a civil question: why the double standards? You mentioned that your Film4 link goes to a different webpage than mine. Who is to say that you gave the correct one, when channel4.com's redesigned film section does not link to your page? RobWill80 23:24, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I've not taken any issue with any of your edits recently. Last week, I changed the link on the Film4 article as filmfour.com did not seem appropriate, as the channel is not called 'FilmFour' any more. Today, you changed it back to www.filmfour.com, pointing out that the relaunched Film4 has been using that URL onscreen. I completely agree, except the URL that they've been using onscreen is filmfour.com, not www.filmfour.com. Therefore I changed it to filmfour.com. And that's it. I really don't see what the problem is here. - Green Tentacle 00:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay. I apologize for thinking there was a problem, when there wasn't. I would ask that you at least consider that the link I gave has more information on channel content and features, rather than the promotional material and the "holding" FAQ (as the URL says) that the current link has. Seems more relevant now that the channel has launched. RobWill80 00:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

The link should be to the offical site. I would say that it is the site physically located at http://www.channel4.com/film/ffchannel/ because that's where filmfour.com (the address given out by Channel 4) directs to and it is the site you get if you click the Film4 link in the top left corner of virtually every page on the Channel 4 site. At the moment, the article is definitely wrong because someone's changed one of the links on the Film4 article to the generic Channel 4 Film site, which is definitely not the Film4 site. - Green Tentacle 14:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't say that I agree with your choice, solely on what’s available on the page. The other link does look to be more informative on content, rather than promotion of the launch. On the other hand, I am not in a position to debate the point. As you quite rightly say, your link is the URL given in the adverts. In regards of the link being changed again, I'm sorry that I can't be of any help, but you'll have to take that up with the person responsible. RobWill80 15:54, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I never said that the most recent URL change was anything to do with you; I was just making an observation. I also never made any conscious choice about which page was better - I just changed it to the official address being given out by Channel 4. If you think that it should point to another page, then change it. You don't need my permission. - Green Tentacle 18:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't trying to appear defensive in my last comment. I know that you were not accusing me of anything. You did mention GarryMc's edit, and my comment was literally meant as advice. Maybe the admins should find a way to add proper smileys to the talk pages. :) Anyway, the point I have is that I'm only trying to help the project. If there are differing views on accuracy, then it should be as useful to the reader as possible. A little like the ITV/ITV1 argument, really. Just my opinion, but I think the features in the "www" link would be more useful. RobWill80 19:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I've changed the bottom link to the "www" redirect, and left the one in the infobox as it is. Doesn't harm to have both links. RobWill80 19:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it's nothing like the ITV/ITV1 argument: the difference there was that we were right and they were wrong :-) - Green Tentacle 20:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Template:ITV

You might want to take a look at the template, Mr 86.131.192.170 I think has taken it a bit far, what do you think?   Keithology  Talk!  18:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Damn right he has. I've reverted the monstrosity before it takes over the world! - Green Tentacle 19:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

BBC radio after switchover

I have written to the BBC to confirm that they will not be removing any radio services after switchover. I will re-edit when they re-confirm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Briantist (talk • contribs) 20:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't quite understand. I wasn't aware, and have never suggested that, the BBC are going to remove any radio services from digital terrestrial television after the digital switchover. What I do know is that BBC Radio 1, BBC Radio 2, BBC Radio 3 and BBC Radio 4 are currently broadcast on Multiplex A and there are no plans for them to move. As Multiplex A is due to become a one of the 'commercial' multiplexes after the switchover, these radio stations will not be on the PSB multiplexes and therefore will not be available on all the relay transmitters like the channels on Multiplexes 1, 2 and B (including Five and S4C, which are moving). - Green Tentacle 21:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Three-revert rule

A minor point, but I'd like to make it: you implied in an edit summary of digital terrestrial television in the United Kingdom that I had broken WP:3RR. I did not, though Briantist did. I'm always very civil about these things. Frankly, I don't like being dragged into these things, but I just don't understand why Brianist keeps changing the article to imply that BBC Radios 1-4 are on a PSB multiplex when they are not. (I also think the Ofcom report says that there will be three PSB multiplexes and three commercial multiplexes after the switchover, but I'm willing to let this go.) Anyway, I'm rambling. Sorry :-) - Green Tentacle 18:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

You're right that you didn't break WP:3RR, so I apologise. When I wrote that, my interpretation of it was that three attempts to revert an article within 24-hours violates Wikipedia policy. I must have missed the part that said "more than three reversions". You did come close, though. If an earlier revert of yours came just 2 hours later, it would be 4 reverts. So be careful. :)

Anyway, WP:3RR wasn't my top concern, because neither of you were trying to intentionally damage the article - you both believe that your own arguments are correct. In my own stubbornness, I've broken it a few times myself, believing that. What I didn't like was the fact that this was disruptive behaviour (no matter who is right or wrong). I thought the two of you needed to stop, gather your evidence, and discuss the matter without disrupting the article (we have both done this over the national name of ITV1, remember? I still say we were right!).

Regarding the subject of the reverts, my understanding is that you are correct... but I don't claim to be an expert. That's why I think it is important that you both hear what each other has to say, and clear this up. RobWill80 20:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:FA Premier League.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:FA Premier League.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 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 02:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

BJBot seems to have a bug in it. The image that was orphaned was originally uploaded by myself but since then had been 'updated' by another user to a very different image and it was this one that was removed from the FA Premier League article and replaced by another. Nevertheless, my original image is the most appropriate, so I have reverted to it and placed it back in the article. - Green Tentacle 14:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure how BJBot could have detected this it is not human. BJ^Talk 23:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Well if it can detect who originally uploaded the image, surely it can tell who uploaded the latest version of the image? It's that person who should be informed, as it's their image that has been orphaned. - Green Tentacle 00:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Most people do not want this as they are just reverting vandalism to the image. BJ^Talk 00:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Netscape throbber 7.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Netscape throbber 7.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Tag added. - Green Tentacle 18:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

British Home Championship

Hi - I see that you have reverted my edits to the style in which the seasons are shown both in the text and in the table from the style 1983-84 to 1983-1984. I take your point that the MoS is more or less silent on this matter, although there seems to be a general concensus that 1983-84 is preferable. Rather than get involved in a disagreement, I have posted a comment for discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#Football_seasons_-_Style and I would invite you to add your thoughts.

Best wishes and happy editing. Daemonic Kangaroo 18:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi - I really don't know why I changed it back. Perhaps it was because I originally wrote the article and don't want to see my finely crafted digits go! Thanks for letting me know about the discussion. I have added my thoughts. - Green Tentacle 19:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Film4.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Film4.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image 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 '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 fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)^(Talk) 20:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. - Green Tentacle 20:26, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Dott-screenshot.png

Hello, Green Tentacle. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Dott-screenshot.png) was found at the following location: User:Green Tentacle. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Edits to English Football League System

Hi - noticed your comment about removing the links to the divisional articles of the Combined Counties League - "Why remove them because the articles exist?" I am intending to make the divisional articles redirects to the main league article, just as I have with the Wessex League for example, but am first tidying things up by removing the links to what will be, in the next day or two, redirects. I think I'm going about this the right way around, but if you feel otherwise please feel free to comment. - fchd 07:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in replying. Well, I think if there is enough content for separate articles, or there ever will be, then the articles should exist (even if in stub form). Nevertheless, I think the fact that I had that all I saw was that links to legitimate articles had been removed shows that you probably did do it the wrong way round; it probably would have been better if you had converted the articles into redirects and then removed the links, probably all in one sitting. But of course, that's only my opinion. - Green Tentacle 16:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

GCSE

Please see Talk:General Certificate of Secondary Education#double award science. MHDIV ɪŋglɪʃnɜː(r)d(Suggestion?|wanna chat?) 12:32, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Replied on the article's talk page. - Green Tentacle 13:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:HotJava throbber.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:HotJava throbber.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 02:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Mozilla throbber 1.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Mozilla throbber 1.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 04:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Mozilla throbber 2.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Mozilla throbber 2.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 04:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:NCSA Mosaic throbber.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:NCSA Mosaic throbber.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 06:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Konqueror throbber.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Konqueror throbber.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 06:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Netscape throbber 1.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Netscape throbber 1.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 07:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Netscape throbber 3.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Netscape throbber 3.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 07:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Netscape throbber 4.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Netscape throbber 4.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 07:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Netscape throbber 5.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Netscape throbber 5.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 07:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Netscape throbber 6.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Netscape throbber 6.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 07:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Netscape throbber 7.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Netscape throbber 7.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 07:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Team_GB.png

I have tagged Image:Team_GB.png as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. BigrTex 21:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Done. - Green Tentacle 11:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:University_of_Sheffield_logo.png

I have tagged Image:University_of_Sheffield_logo.png as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. BigrTex 23:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Done. - Green Tentacle 16:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:University_of_Chester_chapel.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:University_of_Chester_chapel.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 that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, 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 fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 23:31, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Galeon throbber.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Galeon throbber.gif. 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. BetacommandBot 19:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Brian Clough Trophy

Hi. I am intrigued to see that you have deleted the background section that I added to the above page wholesale. In addition, you left the rather sarcastic comment that it was "largely irrelevant". As far as I am concerned an article should be readable as a single entity, and shouldn't require that you have to navigate back and forth just to get even the most simple background information. That section went much of the way to answering the questions that I had when I first came across the page, namely: why was this Trophy so recently set up, why Derby and Nottingham, and why Brian Clough? As for your comment about the tram, that section was intended to convey the information that the Brian Clough Trophy is just one of a number of comemorative namings that have taken place in both cities. The section was not long, it distilled the essential information into just two paragraphs, and it used a third paragraph to set the Trophy into proper context alongside the remainder. Your assertion that the information is largely (only largely, so you admit that you did delete some information not) elsewhere hides the fact that to find the rest of the information you would need to trawl through the very much larger pages on Brian Clough, Derby and Nottingham. Now, I admit that I am quite new to editing in any serious way, but it would seem to me that deleteing another's work out of hand, with no prior discussion, violated Wikipedia's "assume good faith" principle. I'd appreciate hearing your reasoning. Flicktokick 09:32, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing sarcastic about the phrase 'largely irrelevant'. A tram has nothing to do with a football trophy! Anyway, I possibly was too hasty in removing the information, for which I apologise. I think my edit summary did not help - the phrase 'largely irrelevant' probably should have read 'unencyclopædic'. A lot of the wording sounded more like it came out of magazine article than an encyclopædia. Phrases like 'historically have competed for prestige, jobs, investment' and 'perhaps the greatest rivalry of the last century' need references to prove them and words like 'Cloughie' should never be found in an encyclopæia. Perhaps the most worrying phrase is 'the inhabitants of Nottingham and Derby have long maintained a particular animosity for one another' - try replacing 'Nottingham and Derby' with 'France and Germany' and see how long it lasts on Wikipedia. Anyway, I take your main point and have restored your section, but made the tone more encyclopædic, which is probably what I should have done in the first place. My apologies. - Green Tentacle 16:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. I'm still getting used to this tone factor, and I take your point completely. I would disagree with your statement that the animosity comment is worrying though. After all, it is true! I'm wondering how to get that point across while still conforming to this NOPV stricture? Flicktokick 16:29, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps it's true in football terms, but it's certainly not true in general terms. Not everyone from Derby and Nottingham hate each other! I think the phrase 'Derby County and Nottingham Forest, football clubs located just a few miles apart, have long been arch rivals' is more than adequate. - Green Tentacle 16:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Well firstly I never said "hate". The phrase "particular animosity" was carefully chosen to reflect the needling jealousy and one-upmanship that does exist between the two cities, on both sporting and civic levels. I agree that your phrasing describes the footballing situation, I was initially aiming to give wider context, but never mind. The wider context is needed to explain why Brian Clough's influence is greater than just sport. His campaigning on behalf of the Labour Party is sometimes creditied with having a disproportionate influence on the political landscape of each town, for instance. Anyway, so much for context. In additon to my previous comments, I've just noticed that you didn't remove my section, you just reverted all of my edits! Come on, if you wan't to claim encylopedic high-ground at least play the game properly and only remove what needs to be removed. Flicktokick 16:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm afraid the word 'animosity' means 'active hatrid', so that's what people will take it to mean! - Green Tentacle 16:57, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Two can play at that game ;-). It also simply means a feeling or spirit of hostility and resentment. I, personally, have always understoood animosity to be one step removed from outright hatred. More of a repressed, insidious emotion. You pays yer money... Flicktokick 17:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

What is with you? I am trying very hard to assume good faith, but your actions are putting that assumption under a great deal of stress. The first game is still ten days away, so the competition can not yet be referred to in the present tense. Even if it is fairly soon, that does mean that your actions mean that the article will be factually inaccurate for more than a week! The article can easily be changed at the correct time, so why make it wrong now? Not only that, but yet again you have simply reverted my edits rather than adjusting the parts of it that you, personally, take issue with. Your actions mean that you have deleted relevant information, and the article is now gramatically askew, and the syntax is horrible. Flicktokick 21:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

The Brian Clough Trophy is a trophy. It's fair to assume that the trophy physically exists, so it can be referred to in the present tense. It's just that the first match has not yet been played. Your other changes removed links from the lead and put the rules below the background, when the rules should come first, as they are more important. You also added information to sections that will have to be removed later (such as the date of the first match to the lead and a rule applying to just one match in the rules section). Ultimately, Wikipedia is an encyclopædia and the current version should, as far as possible, still make sense even if it is read much later (as it will be, due to other websites republishing the content). The grammar also works fine, unlike your version, where the rules section changes tense twice without explanation. - Green Tentacle 00:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

For the vast majority of sporting awards (e.g. FA Cup, Football League Cup, Winston Cup) the award is referred to in the abstract, and the physical trophy is merely the tangible expression of that. If you want to draw a parallel with the way that the Calcutta Cup is described (and after all I did bring that up) then to mimic this article the BCT one should read "a trophy that will be awarded". To date it has not been. Also, as I stated above, my reading of the press releases and news articles are that the trophy will be inagurated at the initial match. Essentially, this indicates that there is not yet any physical object named "The Brian Clough Trophy". It will only become so when officially decreed at Pride Park on the 31st. To state that everything should be in the present tense just because a bit of silverplate has been knocked out into a cup shape is wrong, and goes against previous precedent. Also, your assertion that the rules section should come first is a little strange, as most articles progress from generalities to specifics, they don't throw detailed information in at the start, then broaden to background, before becoming ever more specific with a list of winners! You need a logical structure. Start broad, focus in.

Secondly, well how about a few examples from the version you keep reverting to...

1. "is an football (soccer) trophy" - do I need to point this one out?
2. "trophy has been awarded" - no it hasn't.
3. "Matches are held" - ok, I missed this the first time, my bad, but you need "to be" in the middle.
4. "to Rugby union's" - choose: Rugby Union or rugby union, neer the twian and all that...
5. "July 31 2007" - Again, either: 31 July 2007 or July 31, 2007. Personally, as this is a UK competition I reckon British English usage is preferrable, so I'd go for the first, in line with the apparant common usage in all other football articles.
6. " " - what's wrong with metioning that the first match will be ended on penalties if needed? This is highly unusual for a supposed "friendly" match.

I guess, in summary, I just don't see what your problem is with keeping this article in the future. You are talking about an event and an award that will be made in eight days time, the correct time to put this into present (and where appropriate, past) tense. Details may change before then, so the {{future sport}} box thing seems highly appropriate to me. What mirror sites do is their own business and lookout, if they choose not to update their feed frequently then they can't expect to be up to date. Flicktokick 07:26, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Please don't change the format of my talk page - it's very bad form. Right, the rules section needs to be first because that's more important than the background and what an average visitor to this page is likely to want to know first, especially given the unusual nature of the competiton. Both the FA Cup and League Cup articles have rules before their histories.

Your other points:

"is an football (soccer) trophy" - do I need to point this one out?

Oops. Changed 'an' to 'a'.

"trophy has been awarded" - no it hasn't.

Actually, the trophy has been awarded to the winner of every Derby-Forest match since it was announced - it's just that there haven't been any matches yet.

"Matches are held" - ok, I missed this the first time, my bad, but you need "to be" in the middle.

That's just present tense, as is the rest of the article.

"to Rugby union's" - choose: Rugby Union or rugby union, neer the twian and all that...

My mistake. Changed.

"July 31 2007" - Again, either: 31 July 2007 or July 31, 2007. Personally, as this is a UK competition I reckon British English usage is preferrable, so I'd go for the first, in line with the apparant common usage in all other football articles.

Though it's a misconception that there is an official British English way of writing dates, I'm really not bothered how it's written. It will still appear differently for each Wikipedia user, depending on how they have set their date preferences.

" - what's wrong with metioning that the first match will be ended on penalties if needed? This is highly unusual for a supposed "friendly" match.

There's nothing wrong with mentioning it at all, but a rule for one match should not be mentioned in the rules section, which is for all matches.

It just seems a lot of work to make everything future tense and then change it again. Nevertheless, I've changed the whole article to the future tense. Since you went to the trouble of writing such a long comment, you probably deserve your way for sheer effort. - Green Tentacle 13:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC U 1970-1982.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC U 1970-1982.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 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. — Moe ε 18:16, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC A 1970-1982.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC A 1970-1982.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 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. — Moe ε 18:16, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC AA 1970-1982.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC AA 1970-1982.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 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. — Moe ε 18:16, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC X 1970-1982.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC X 1970-1982.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 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. — Moe ε 18:16, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC R18 1982-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC R18 1982-2002.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 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. — Moe ε 18:20, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC U 1982-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC U 1982-2002.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 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. — Moe ε 18:20, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC PG 1982-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC PG 1982-2002.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 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. — Moe ε 18:20, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC 15 1982-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 15 1982-2002.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 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. — Moe ε 18:20, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC 18 1982-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 18 1982-2002.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 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. — Moe ε 18:20, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC 12 1989-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 12 1989-2002.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 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. — Moe ε 18:26, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC Uc 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC Uc 2002 onwards.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 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. — Moe ε 18:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC U 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC U 2002 onwards.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 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. — Moe ε 18:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC PG 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC PG 2002 onwards.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 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. — Moe ε 18:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC 12A 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 12A 2002 onwards.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 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. — Moe ε 18:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC 15 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 15 2002 onwards.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 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. — Moe ε 18:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC 18 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 18 2002 onwards.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 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. — Moe ε 18:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BBFC R18 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC R18 2002 onwards.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 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. — Moe ε 18:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BBFC 12 2002 onwards.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:BBFC 12 2002 onwards.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I did add fair use rationales to all of the BBFC symbols, but I must have missed that one. Someone seems to have added it in for me now. - Green Tentacle 21:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:The Book of Mozilla, 7-15.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:The Book of Mozilla, 7-15.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 '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. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 22:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

re: Book of Mozilla

Your edit summary[2] is incorrect, Image:Book of Mozilla 7-15.png does not in fact contain the logo in question (the firefox logo. I don't think the red lizard head is under non-free copyright restrictions like the firefox logo is.) --—Random832 19:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I always thought that the red lizard head (which is in both images) was under the same licence. I might be wrong, though. - Green Tentacle 17:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Shakespeare titles

That's odd, because we don't do that in practice at all. I reverted it back to be consistent with all the other plays, but we should definitely talk about this at the Shakespeare project. If we do change Othello, we should change them all. That's why I reverted it, just until we decide so we can get them all right and in agreement. I just started a discussion on the topic at the project page. Wrad 00:56, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

There was certainly a time (a couple of years ago) when this was the case, so we had The Most Excellent and Lamentable Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet and The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark etc. Personally, I think that having the full titles is necessary and the only way to have the Shakespeare's plays articles comply with WP:LEAD (the actual articles should, of course, reside at the common name). More to the point, it offers more information, which is surely what an encyclopaedia is all about. There is, of course, the issue of conflicting full titles, but a quick glance at virtually any of the Arden editions of the plays will find that the hard work of establishing the correct full title has already been done (which is what we did with Romeo and Juliet). - Green Tentacle 01:15, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, don't just tell me, tell the project. I can tell you this, though, things have changed. I'm not the only one who reverts such things. Wrad 01:17, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I wrote my reply when I saw the first version of your message, which you edited three times while I was typing my response. Having seen the most recent version of your message, which mentions the project page, I added my response to your discussion over there. There really is no need to be so rude. - Green Tentacle 01:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to be rude. I just wanted to make sure that you and I weren't the only ones talking about it. Others need to be involved, and I didn't know what you were planning to do. And it may have looked rude to say "things have changed", but I was merely stating it as fact. Somewhere along the way, what we said to do, and what we actually did, split into two different things. We need to fix this. I'm sure you'll agree. Wrad 01:26, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

It did look rude, but I accept your apology. Of course, we do need to sort this out. I've just added another response on the project page. One of the (many) problems with Wikipedia is the number of policies that change. For example, I currently have a lot of image tag warnings on this talk page; the images were correctly uploaded at the time, but since then the policy has changed and I then get (usually automated) messages lambasting me for not uploading images under rules that had not even been invented when I uploaded them! - Green Tentacle 01:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about that again. Sometimes the shortest way to say things isn't the best way, I guess. I've personally noticed that this is one of the more contested issues on Shakespeare pages, and was hoping for a chance to discuss it. I guess we'll be part of the problem—changing policy again. Wrad 01:42, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:The Guardian.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:The Guardian.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 '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. BetacommandBot 23:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:BBFC A 1913-1970.png

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC A 1913-1970.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

See User talk:BetacommandBot#Complaint. - Green Tentacle 15:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:BBFC H 1932-1951.png

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC H 1932-1951.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:44, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

See User talk:BetacommandBot#Complaint. - Green Tentacle 15:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:BBFC U 1913-1970.png

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC U 1913-1970.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

See User talk:BetacommandBot#Complaint. - Green Tentacle 15:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:BBFC X 1951-1970.png

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC X 1951-1970.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

See User talk:BetacommandBot#Complaint. - Green Tentacle 15:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Clearer explanation

Please see here. Thanks. Carcharoth 00:59, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Derby County F.C. seasons

Hi. I reverted your redirect of Derby County F.C. seasons to History of Derby County F.C.. I did this as these football seasons article can reach all the way to FL status, so I really don't see what improvement removing them is doing for Wikipedia! Just thought I'd let you know. Thanks, Mattythewhite 17:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Given you reverted an edit I made three months ago, I had to think for a while to remember what you're referring to! I'm also afraid that I have no idea what 'these football seasons article can reach all the way to FL status' means. My edit removed nothing: the entire content of the Derby County F.C. seasons article is in the History of Derby County F.C. - there seems very little point in having exactly the same content in two different places. I've therefore changed the seasons article back to a redirect. - Green Tentacle 18:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I entirely beg to differ. I recommend you take a look at these two articles: Ipswich Town F.C. seasons and History of Stoke City F.C.. This is why these should be seperate. Mattythewhite 21:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Er, what's your point? Both those articles feature entirely unique content. The content of the Derby County seasons article is entirely copied from the Derby County history page. Wikipedia articles should never consist of content entirely available in other articles. - Green Tentacle 21:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah... I never actually saw the table on the history article.. my apologies! I'll remove the table from the history article. Could you please then revert the seasons page, as I'll be on 3RR. Thanks, Mattythewhite 21:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your apology. Personally, I feel that the seasons table is best off left on the history page, as it is part of the history and the history page isn't that long. Nevertheless, if you want to change it, feel free. You're no where near breaking the three revert rule, as breaking it would mean reverting the page more than three times in twenty-four hours. You're currently only on one reversion (your first reversion was more than twenty-four hours ago). - Green Tentacle 21:46, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:WJEC.png

Thanks for uploading Image:WJEC.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:WJEC.png has a perfectly good fair use rationale. The problem is that someone else has moved the article from WJEC to Welsh Joint Education Committee. But, because this is Wikipedia, it is my fault that the the user who moved the article did not update the image's fair use rationale, in just the same it will be my fault the next time someone decides to update the fair use rationale guidelines, making all images I've uploaded in the past invalid.

I wish bots would spend more time fixing this easy problem rather than shouting at users who have done everything right (again).

I've not updated the image's fair use rationale. What's the point? Later on someone will just change something and I'll have to change it again. What a waste of time. - Green Tentacle 22:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Team GB.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Team GB.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 '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. BetacommandBot (talk) 15:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Football Conference.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Football Conference.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Westfield Derby.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Westfield Derby.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 '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) 05:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC 12 1989-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 12 1989-2002.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 '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) 00:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC 15 1982-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 15 1982-2002.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 '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) 00:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC 18 1982-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 18 1982-2002.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 '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) 00:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC PG 1982-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC PG 1982-2002.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 '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) 00:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC R18 1982-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC R18 1982-2002.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 '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) 00:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC U 1982-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC U 1982-2002.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 '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) 01:00, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC Uc 1985-2002.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC Uc 1985-2002.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 '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) 01:00, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Observer front page.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Observer front page.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Save-Me-Oprah^(talk) 21:00, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Book of Mozilla, 3-31.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:The Book of Mozilla, 3-31.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. w^{L<speak·check>} 21:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Book of Mozilla, 12-10.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:The Book of Mozilla, 12-10.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. w^{L<speak·check>} 21:47, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

A favour request

Hi,

Thank you for deleting Image:Chester Old College.jpg, as I had copied it to Commons, obsoleting the original image.

As your user page suggests that you are very willing to help, I would like to ask you a related favour. I have also copied another one of my images, Image:Derby Midland Station Departures Board.jpg, to Commons; could you please delete the now-unneeded Wikipedia version of the image?

Also, both the images I transferred to Commons have a tag (added by the tool I used to upload it) saying that they need to be reviewed. I don't really understand what this means, but is it something you are able to do?

Thank you muchly! - Green Tentacle (talk) 16:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I've deleted the local image. The reason why the bot tags the images so is because people can upload non-free images or copyright violations to the Commons; also, the bot isn't smart enough to properly categorize them. Normally a "trusted user" on Commons needs to review the image, but since these two are properly categorized and obviously have licenses that check out, you can go ahead and remove the tag. east.718 at 19:59, March 31, 2008

Cool; I've done that. Thanks! - Green Tentacle (talk) 20:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:University of Chester coat of arms.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:University of Chester coat of arms.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) 12:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I love bots. Warning me that an image I orphaned and I listed for deletion is orphaned. Isn't that nice?! - Green Tentacle (talk) 16:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Isthmian_League.jpg

I have tagged Image:Isthmian_League.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 04:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Er, if you bothered looking at the history of the image, you'd find that I did not add the fair use rationale. There was no requirement for one back when I uploaded the image. I know the rationale isn't valid now, but it really is nothing to do with me. I just do not understand why the original uploader of the image is always held responsible for any subsequent changes to fair use rules that invalidate every image on Wikipedia. I'm sick of it. It would be much easier — and more useful to Wikipedia — if editors who find invalid fair use rationales fixed them, rather than whining to users who have probably forgotten that they uploaded the image in the first place. - Green Tentacle (talk) 23:04, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Asa Dotzler.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Asa Dotzler.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Asa Dotzler.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Polly (Parrot) 00:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... interesting. This image was definitely available on Flickr under the the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Licence when I originally uploaded it, though the page now bears no such licence. I uploaded the image at the same time as Image:Mitchell Baker.jpg, which was taken by the same photographer at the same event and was also available under the same licence. In fact, another user uploaded exactly the same image to Commons (without crediting me as the original uploader), leading to my original image on Wikipedia being deleted as it was a duplicate. The Flickr page for that image has also lost its the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Licence. The photographer has obviously decided to retract their licensing of the image under Creative Commons. I don't the legal ins and outs of this (can someone retract a licence?), but if Image:Asa Dotzler.jpg is to be deleted, so should Image:Mitchell Baker.jpg. Likewise, if one is kept, so should the other (presumably both stored on Commons). - Green Tentacle (talk) 20:36, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

No a creative Commons license can't be revoked see here. That though is the advantage of uploading Flickr images to Commons, they usually get reviewed within 24hrs to ascertain if the licensing is correct. That way at least if at some future date the Flickr licensing is changed then we can be pretty certain that at the time of upload it was indeed under a free license. Polly (Parrot) 20:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's a bit of a moot point now, since someone completely ignored the {{hangon}} tag and the reasoning on the image's talk page and deleted it anyway. - Green Tentacle (talk) 20:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes it is very frustrating when license changes occur, all I can advise is that in future you upload Flickr images to Commons or use web citation if you upload to here, that way at least you should have some evidence of the license you uploaded under. Polly (Parrot) 21:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I probably would upload to Commons now, but I don't think I even knew it existed in 2005! - Green Tentacle (talk) 21:08, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Qualified Teacher Status

Hello - I see you undid some earlier edit on this QTS article. I can see that this was in good faith, as you reverted to what was previously the requirement. However, since the most recent edition of standards for initial teacher training, the requirements have been amended slightly to those which were written in by the unregistered user. I have now added a reference linking to the TDA to clarify this point as it is likely to be a common mistake due to the all-too-frequent changes by the TDA of such issues. Tafkam (talk) 22:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Didn't know about the change. - Green Tentacle (talk) 22:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

OCR

Bottom line is, you must discuss a potentially contraversial move before making it, and arrive at a consensus. Please do so on the article's talk page. Per the moving page, "WARNING! This can be a drastic and unexpected change for a popular page; please be sure you understand the consequences of this before proceeding." _TalkIslander 22:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, I resent you accussing me of edit warring. All I did was move an article. As explained in my edit summary (and have done again on Talk:OCR (examination board)), all I was doing was following Wikipedia policy, which clearly states the article should be at its spelled out name. The bottom line is that there is nothing to discuss and there is absolutely nothing controversial about this move. The policy makes it quite clear that I am correct. - Green Tentacle (talk) 22:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

See my talk page and the article's talk page. _TalkIslander 22:55, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Your undiscussed changes to University of Chester

I have reverted your changes to the referencing style in University of Chester. It was an undiscussed change that altered the style of all the references for no apparent good or compelling reason. If you think the referencing style you changed them to should be used instead of the quite common used in all areas of Wikipedia, please discuss them on the article's talk page before reinstating them. Many thanks.  DDStretch  (talk) 22:25, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

You seem to have misunderstood what actually happened. The user before me, Gaius Cornelius, changed the referencing system without consultation and I changed it back. This perfectly follows Wikipedia's guidelines: it says in Wikipedia:REF#Ref tags and punctuation (which I linked to my edit summary), 'if an article has evolved using predominantly one style of ref tag placement, the whole article should conform to that style unless there is a consensus to change it'. - Green Tentacle (talk) 23:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, my mistake. My apologies. I must say, however, that I find that style highly ugly in comparison with the punctuation before the footnote style (which I also dislike, but have come to live with), and I suspect it will cause some raised eyebrows if the article is put forward for FA status. I was going to revert it back for you, but I see you've done it for me. Once again, my apologies. It was brought about by noticing an unusual and (as I said) rather ugly formatting, from my point of view.  DDStretch  (talk) 23:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I personally prefer the footnote before the punctuation style because the footnote invariably is linked to that sentence and it therefore seems logical that it should be 'part' of it and it also makes more sense on occasions where footnotes are used mid-sentence. Also, it's what I used to and I think it looks pretty! - Green Tentacle (talk) 23:19, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah well, no harm then. There's no accounting for taste (I'm used to "Harvard" referencing, though I know it as APA style.)  DDStretch  (talk) 23:27, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

1939 FA Charity Shield

How do you know Portsmouth F.C. won the shield I can't find the result. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Hall of England (talk • contribs) 08:58, 21 August 2008

I assume you're referring to this edit I made to the 1939-40 in English football page. As I made the edit three years ago, I can't remember where I got the information from. It could well have been the FA Community Shield page, which looked like this at the time and listed Portsmouth as the winners. Having searched around a bit, I can't find any evidence that the Charity Shield was played at all that year, but I did find out that the result listed on the page matches the FA Cup final score of that year, so I presume that someone accidentally added the FA Cup score to the list. This is particularly plausible as the same mistake had been made with the 1946 and 1947 results, which I removed at the time. I note that the 1939 error has since been removed from the FA Community Shield page, but not the 1939-40 in English football page. I have now rectified this. - Green Tentacle (talk) 00:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Digital terristal

the channel list is still there it is in it own article, the channels are not vital to be on the main article please go to talk it has already been discussed--Andrewcrawford (talk) 22:11, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Two comments posted eleven minutes apart is not a discussion. - Green Tentacle (talk) 22:19, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:What Do I Wish for Now.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:What Do I Wish for Now.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. 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 description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 03:47, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC 15 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 15 2002 onwards.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 '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) 05:06, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC U 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC U 2002 onwards.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 '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) 05:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC 12 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 12 2002 onwards.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 '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) 05:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC 12A 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 12A 2002 onwards.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 '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) 05:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC 18 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC 18 2002 onwards.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 '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) 05:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BBFC PG 2002 onwards.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:BBFC PG 2002 onwards.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 '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) 05:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

University of Chester

Hi there. Would you mind explaining what it is that I removed from University of Chester that led you to revert me? There are a number of style and markup changes that I fully intend to restore. Thanks. — mholland (talk) 17:59, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey. It was mainly the two statements that it is one of the oldest higher education institutions in the country, which was fully referenced and the highlighting of the fact that Chester's situation regarding Chester's status turned around completely between the 1930s and 1960s (the paragraph seems confusing without that). Many perfectly valid external links were also removed and, as you said, some of the formatting was made a bit messy. Thanks. - Green Tentacle (talk) 18:50, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I have again removed the Univerity of Chester site from the list of External Lists, and I ask you to not include it again, as doing so goes against wikipedia guidelines and policies. Read WP:EL, in particular points 3 and 4 of section 1 (Important points to consider) and section 7.2 (References and citation). You will see that these clearly imply that when the University of Chester site has already been linked to (indeed to the exact same page on that site), then a link should not be included in the External Links. In the same context, it is generally looked upon as a good move to try to minimize as many External Links as possible (see references to the points I've already provided), and so some of the ones in that section should be converted if possible into full-blown references and used in the text, thus removing them also from the External Links section.  DDStretch  (talk) 21:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Pretty typical Wikipedia: a stupid guideline is considered more important than the reader. A reader is clearly going to expect an External Links section to contain a link to the institution in question.

Nevertheless, I note that the guideline says 'include appropriate external links in an "External links" section at the end and/or in the appropriate location within an infobox' (emphasis mine). I also note that the guideline says that 'common sense' should be used. I am therefore invoking some common sense and restoring the link. - Green Tentacle (talk) 23:51, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I have asked for additional views on the matter at WP:UKGEO, and I wonder whether you are too easily invoking WP:IAR here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ddstretch (talk • contribs) 00:15, 1 December 2008

That sounds sensible, though I find your assumption that I will simply revert you again offensive. I have to disagree with you on my use of WP:IAR, though. Any rule that states that an external links section should not contain an external link to whatever the article is about is inherently stupid. - Green Tentacle (talk) 01:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind response on my talk page. I can see that the external links are now being discussed generally. Just by way of response to your other concerns:

The claim that Chester is "one of the oldest higher education institutions in the country" isn't actually referenced. The source supplied is a university press-release which (in its Notes to Editors) contains the claim that Chester was "one of Britain’s first purpose-built teacher training colleges". I would be very happy to adjust the article to include this claim instead, unless a proper source for the current claim can be found.

I thought the link to the Robbins Report would be sufficient, should a reader want to know more about Britain's HE in the 1960s. I'll settle for finding a source to reference the "turnaround" in the sector, and just adjust the clumsy phrasing ("the UK was massively expanding its higher education capacity") if that's all right.

I'll leave it until the current EL discussion is more advanced before making any changes at all. — mholland (talk) 07:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Thank you also for your support on the WP:UKGEO discussion. I see the article now has no external links section at all. Sigh...

The best source I could find to Chester's age is http://www.chester.ac.uk/about/, though I'm sure I saw I better one once (unfortunately, I wrote most of the article before referencing was widespread in Wikipedia and have had to add all the references in later).

As to the Robbins Report, it's not a turnaround in the UK's higher education section (it's pretty much always been growing, though at different rates), but a turnaround in Chester's situation: it went from being threatened with closure to being proposed to join a very small (at the time) number of British universities. - Green Tentacle (talk) 17:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:What Do I Wish for Now.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:What Do I Wish for Now.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. 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 description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 08:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Erm, the image fulfils the stated criteria. It is only used in one article, which is explicitly named and linked to, using Wikipedia's recommended template. - Green Tentacle (talk) 19:24, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Irony at WJEC

I'm just finishing cleaning up the aftermath of your renaming of the article for radio station WJEC, and one of the incoming links to WJEC was your talk page archive #3 which included this text from you: "Image:WJEC.png has a perfectly good fair use rationale. The problem is that someone else has moved the article from WJEC to Welsh Joint Education Committee. But, because this is Wikipedia, it is my fault that the the user who moved the article did not update the image's fair use rationale, in just the same it will be my fault the next time someone decides to update the fair use rationale guidelines, making all images I've uploaded in the past invalid." I thought you'd appreciate the irony that this time it was your move of the article at WJEC that required the updating of a fair use template (this time for the radio station's logo). It's no big deal—I just thought you'd get the same kind of chuckle out of this that I did. - Dravecky (talk) 04:19, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess there is a certain sense of irony!

Technically, I didn't move the article, but as I requested the move, I did spend a while fixing some incoming links (here, here, here and here). Alas, another user changed one of my edits, which is where you came in to fix it.

I deliberately left the radio station's fair use rationale because the excellent FairuseBot now fixes these rationales automatically. The previous issue about the exam board's logo was because BetacommandBot found the image and rudely shout at me, when I'd done nothing wrong (hence the rant which you quoted above). Luckily, that bot has now been banned.

An extended version of the discussion is available, if you're interested.

Thank you for updating the radio station's rationale. This is the way Wikipedia should work: users working together, not bots shouting at people.

Thanks. - Green Tentacle (talk) 13:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Notability of SPC ECO

A tag has been placed on SPC ECO requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.  Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 12:50, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of 3-D (album)

A tag has been placed on 3-D (album), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Dlohcierekim 13:19, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 3-D (album)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article 3-D (album), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

not convinced of notability of band or album

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Dlohcierekim 13:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of History of British film certificates

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is History of British film certificates. 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/History of British film certificates. 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) 01:13, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:AQA Logo.png

⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

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

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:32, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:SPC ECO - 3-D.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SPC ECO - 3-D.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

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

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:53, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:I Issue 1.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:I Issue 1.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:06, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, I thought I selected it. It's a bit dumb that the form lets you make a mistake like that. - Green Tentacle (talk) 15:06, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Football Conference.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Football Conference.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 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 in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:18, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

McLeish

Hello. I agree the linked article doesn't now say "BBC Sport understands", but it did yesterday. BBC websites have an irritating habit of updating their stories at the same URL, which not infrequently causes confusion. I'm not going to edit war about the sentence you added, but it looks like the only thing in dispute is the meaning of "accepting" a resignation. If it means "and he can go forthwith without observing his contractual obligations", then certainly they haven't accepted it. If I tender my resignation, I don't expect to leave that day and go and work for the company next door, I have to work a notice period or do whatever else it says in my contract. That's what they're expecting of McLeish: that he doesn't go off to the Villa or elsewhere without coming up with the compensation specified in his contract. The linked article says (before they change it again :-) "Birmingham have begun the process of looking for a new manager after appearing to accept that Alex McLeish will leave St Andrew's." McLeish is probably still under contract to Birmingham, but he certainly isn't their manager. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 13:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

While I agree that McLeish will certainly never actually 'manage' Birmingham City ever again (as has been the case right since he sent his infamous email), his is still – officially at least – the club's manager. The club needs to accept his resignation or change his role (neither of which have happened – yet) before this situation changes. He should be listed as manager until that ceases to be his job title (including any notice period).

Given the article currently says their manager is Martin O'Neill (or attempts to: the wikicode is malformed), I've changed it back to Alex McLeish, as he remains the club's official manager. I suppose the issue could be elaborated on in the main text, but I'll leave that to others. - Green Tentacle (talk) 14:50, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:CIELogo.png

⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

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

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:56, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Derby County.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Derby County.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. Skier Dude (talk) 06:12, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Netscape throbber 2.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Netscape throbber 2.gif, 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. Stefan2 (talk) 14:59, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:SPC ECO - 3-D.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:SPC ECO - 3-D.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 '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) 04:11, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Cinema de Lux.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Cinema de Lux.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) 04:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Football League logo 1988-2004.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Football League logo 1988-2004.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. --Bloonstdfan360 / talk / contribs 18:02, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:WJEC.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WJEC.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) 00:21, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

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) 13:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Football League Logo

Are you able to post a high resolution/vector version of the original 1888 Football League logo? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexolive71 (talk • contribs) 11:55, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, five years passed between your message and me logging in. I'm afraid I don't have a high resolution version of the original Football League logo. I think I just found the one I uploaded way back on a website (no need for a fair use rationale 15 years ago). The only other copies of it online seem to have been taken from Wikipedia before its deletion. It's a shame that the logo and the following one from 1888–2004 have been deleted, given the 2004–2016 logo has been spared. - Green Tentacle (talk) 22:10, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:The Football League logo until 1988.png

Thank you for uploading File:The Football League logo until 1988.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 seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 13:14, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Football Conference.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Football Conference.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) 17:46, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BBFC Uc 2002 onwards.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:BBFC Uc 2002 onwards.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) 18:30, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:University of Sheffield coat of arms.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:University of Sheffield coat of arms.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) 02:33, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:University of Sheffield logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:University of Sheffield 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) 02:34, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

File:The Football League.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:The Football League.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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:03, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

And, after its restoration at Deletion Review, I've renominated it at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 September 14#File:The Football League.png. —Cryptic 00:06, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Derbyshire Children's Hospital

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Derbyshire Children's Hospital requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Andrew nyr (talk, contribs) 00:07, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:National Association for the Teaching of English (logo).gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:National Association for the Teaching of English (logo).gif. 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) 02:59, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:15, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Teachers' trade unions in the United Kingdom

In the Teachers' trade unions in the United Kingdom, which you created, someone pointed out that the National Society for Education in Art and Design isn't listed there. Since I know next to nothing about education in the UK, perhaps you could add the relevant information to that page? Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 20:40, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the question. To the best of my knowledge, NSEAD is a subject association, rather than a trade union, so isn't really in the scope of the article. – Green Tentacle (talk) 17:35, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Associated Examining Board (logo).png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Associated Examining Board (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) 03:23, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:OCR (Oxford, Cambridge and RSA Examinations) logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:OCR (Oxford, Cambridge and RSA Examinations) 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) 18:58, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Scottish Qualfications Authority coat of arms.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Scottish Qualfications Authority coat of arms.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) 03:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Associated Examing Board coat of arms.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Associated Examing Board coat of arms.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) 03:24, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:AEB-SEG logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:AEB-SEG 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) 18:23, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nowhere album cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Nowhere album cover.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) 17:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Eduqas logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Eduqas 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) 17:14, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:University of Chester coat of arms (fair use).png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:University of Chester coat of arms (fair use).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) 17:36, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:SIMS.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:SIMS.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) 18:29, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Southern League.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Southern League.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) 18:20, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Digital 3&4, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Channel 5. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:10, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:I Issue 1.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:I Issue 1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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. Paradoctor (talk) 02:39, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:University of Chester coat of arms (fair use).png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:University of Chester coat of arms (fair use).png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free 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) 17:47, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:OCR (Oxford, Cambridge and RSA Examinations) logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:OCR (Oxford, Cambridge and RSA Examinations) 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 non-free 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) 02:46, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Nomination of Undergraduate degree for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Undergraduate degree is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Undergraduate degree until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 08:25, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Derbyshire FA Centenary Cup, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chesterfield, England was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 9 April 2026 (UTC)