User talk:Bodhi Peace/Archive 1

Image copyright problem with Image:Permamandala.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Permamandala.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

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

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:09, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

About File:Permamandala.png

Hi, I see file-image: , in commons and the english wikipedia, and I could want translate it to spanish (my native language), and will upload a derivative image as a svg file, created by me (in spanish indeed)...

My question is, if the image is under GPL license, can I make all has said ?

Thanks for your answer.

Nice day.

V A R G U X - write me a comment 13:10, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Reckless editing

Seriously, can you slow down? Your edits are not improvements. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 06:06, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

• Ok, I'm done. "Onomatopoeia", "cross-pollination", and "idiom" were not being used well. Bod (talk) 06:19, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Painting, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Intensity. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 10:06, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of M. Graham

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 M. Graham 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 an organization or company, but it 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 removed 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. KDS4444^Talk 11:44, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:M. Graham Logo.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:57, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Golden Artist Colors Logo.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:28, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Why?

Why? McCay is notorious for the illegibility of his dialogue balloons, and now we have an illegible strip fragment in place of a full strip. What is this image supposed to have improved? Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 08:50, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

• Just find anything to replace that Segar comic strip. It is very old, there is no color, the artwork is poor, and each panel looks nearly identical. Bod (talk) 09:03, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
  • "Very old"?—the McCay predates the Segar by nearly twenty years. Surely there's something better if you want colour—there are plenty of golden-age comic books that have fallen into the public domain, for instance. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 09:20, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
    • If you are dissatisfied with the McCay piece, feel free to replace it. I just searched wikimedia for images of comics with a free license. And by "old", I meant mostly by the style of the artwork. I have a book on drawing comics from the '30s and there is a distinctive look. That top image doesn't have to be the "ultimate comic", it just has to look good for the article. Bod (talk) 01:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
      • No, it doesn't just have to "look good" for the article—the lead image has to represent the article and demonstrate its contents. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 02:24, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Bob Ross, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Mlpearc (open channel) 01:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

• What? That doesn't make sense. I didn't add anything, I just fixed some grammar and punctuation and changed some paragraphs. Why did you revert my 3 edits? Bod (talk) 03:26, 23 November 2015 (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) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Redirect Swatch

You want to introduce the new lemma "Swatch (Watch)" instead of just "Swatch" as existing lemma. Are you aware, that "Swatch" is a registered Trade Mark/brand name owned by the Swatch Group?--BBCLCD (talk) 08:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited November 2015 Paris attacks, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint-Denis. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Notice

Please read this notification carefully, it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, such as November 2015 Paris attacks, which you have recently edited. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions. RGloucester — ☎ 13:51, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: My Therapy Buddy (November 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:My Therapy Buddy and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 04:03, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Why

...did you re-add an image of a Ford Expedition vehicle to an article about a mass shooting? Are you aware that this is not how we use images in encylopedia articles? Viriditas (talk) 04:56, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

• No I was not entirely aware. I was offended that the only image was of the perpetrator, so I figured any other relevant image would help to balance out the article. Obviously, it would be nice to have the image of the actual vehicle. There was a request for images on the talk page. It does not seem to be bothering other people. Why don't you bring it up on the talk page. Bod (talk) 06:02, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Please be aware that there are 1RR] restrictions (one revert in 24 hrs) at 2015 San Bernardino shooting . I'd suggest you self revert your last edit to remain compliant with the discretionary sanctions. - Cwobeel (talk) 01:49, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victims of the November 2015 Paris attacks

Before re-reverting you on the headers, why is there a good reason for them? They're out of process, break the AfD log for that day, and contribute nothing to the conversation. ansh666 23:40, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

There is precedence for this behavior on other AfDs. Anything that breaks down a large page of editing makes the edits clearer and easier to find. Sometimes there are even arbitrary headers (Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_victims_of_the_November_2008_Mumbai_attacks). Bod (talk) 23:46, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I'll leave them, but I still think they're pointless.

If you do this again, though, make sure that your headers aren't the same level as the AfD header itself. ansh666 23:49, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

@Ansh666: I didn't add them... Bod (talk) 23:52, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah, sorry! I couldn't find where they were added in the history, so I assumed that you did since you reverted me. But in case you ever decide to add them, now you know! ansh666 00:00, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. N2e (talk) 11:33, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Help me!

Please help me with a problem I am having with another user. This user is the owner of the Comics article. This user reverts most edits made to his article and antagonizes and belittles people on the talk page. This person may be widely read on the topic and all the source material, but they do not encourage contributions or suggestions to the article and thus have stalemated it in a quagmire of dry, obscure language and erudite focus. Once in the past, there was a "Third Party" dispute resolution, the discussion of which is now archived. Is there a way an administrator can tell this person to be more cooperative or ban them from reverting edits to the article for a month?

Bod (talk) 23:36, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi there. This is just a side note, and I can't help you with your problem. I just wanted you to know that no one on Wikipedia owns articles. All articles are accessible by everyone, and are not owned. --allthefoxes ^(Talk) 04:11, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

You would need to follow the steps on this page before seeking admin intervention, this is a content dispute which does not require immediate admin attention. Amortias (T)(C) 16:47, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Fuck God listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Fuck God. Since you had some involvement with the Fuck God redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. clpo13_(talk) 19:26, 21 February 2016 (UTC)