It's more likely that I read any messages if you leave them here.

Tertia Aemilia

edit

I wrote an article on Aemilia Paulla, wife of Scipio Africanus. You wrote an article on Cornelia Africana with some nice pictures. I am looking for pictures like this I could add to my article or a possible new article on Cornelia Major. Do you know of any such pictures that might work on these articles? I'll watch for your answer here. --Doug talk 14:40, 21 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

A flower...

edit
 
A flower for the 8th of March, from User:Zocky

Please use edit summaries

edit

Hello. Please be courteous to other editors and use edit summaries when updating articles. The Mathbot tool shows your usage of edit summaries to be very low:

Edit summary usage for Muriel Gottrop: 47% for major edits and 0% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace.

Using edit summaries helps other editors quickly understand your edits, which is especially useful when you make changes to articles that are on others' watchlists. Thanks and happy editing! --Kralizec! (talk) 16:28, 7 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Muriel, the page you listed won't let me save the text. If you could, please post this to that page.


The correct title for Eugenie is "Princess Eugenie of York", never Eugenie, Princess of York. The latter would be correct only for a divorced wife of a 'Prince of York'.

The children of royal peers are always titled Prince/ss [name] of title. Prince William's title is Prince William of Wales, as confirmed in the court circular and by Buckingham Palace and Clarence House.

Thus, before becoming queen, Queen Victoria was Princess Victorian Alexandrina of Kent. The current queen before her father became king was Princess Elizabeth of York. The current Prince of Wales before his mother became queen was given the courtesy title Prince Charles of Edinburgh by King George VI. That is also why the wife of Prince Michael of Kent is Princess Michael of Kent, never ever Michael, Princess of Kent. She would be Michael, Princess of Kent if she and her husband divorced, though she might with the Queen's permission use her own name instead of 'Michael'. FearÉIREANN \(caint) 17:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)Reply


Thanks, FearÉIREANN \(caint) 17:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)Reply


FA Review of Charles Ives

edit

Charles Ives has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. MrPrada 08:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Happy birthday, Amiga!

edit
 
Happy birthday

Hello, Muriel! Hopefully I've got in first this time to wish you a very happy birthday. I hope life is treating you well in Portugal or wherever you are now, and wish you many happy returns for many years to come.

An old fan, David Cannon 02:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

British monarchs' family tree

edit

Hello, Muriel. Just letting you know of 'two' errors on the 'family tree' map (under Victoria & descendants). 1- Elizabeth II succeeded the throne in 1952 (was crowned in 1953); 2- Victoria, princess royal married Frederick III of Germany (not his father, William I). Cheers. GoodDay 22:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Also, 'Henry Stuart, Prince of Wales' was born in 1594 & some of the 'accession dates' are mistakenly 'coronation dates'. GoodDay 22:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

AfD nomination of List of young people in history

edit

List of young people in history, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that List of young people in history satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of young people in history and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of List of young people in history during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. J-stan TalkContribs 02:48, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Re: The young people

edit

I have nothing against you, or for that matter anyone on the project. I saw a list of indiscriminate info, and thought it didn't belong on Wikipedia. I think this isn't a good reason to leave, but I respect your right to leave. Please don't take the deletion of your page personally. J-ſtan!TalkContribs 23:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well, in that case, welcome back! Second of all, only the list was deleted. The information is still on Wikipedia, just not collected together in that way. If you wanted to stop the deletion, you should have voiced your opinion. J-ſtan!TalkContribs 02:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Question

edit

If I understand your question correctly, the answer is yes. Image copyright templates can be removed or changed by any editor, including the uploader. Accurate tags should not be removed, of course. If you want me to look at any particular image, I'd be happy to do so. Good luck! -- But|seriously|folks  01:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

You could instead tag them with {{Db-author}}, and they would probably get deleted, as long as they're not obviously useful. I looked at your upload log, though, and there's only one image, and it's not a family tree. Were they uploaded under a different ID, or have they been moved to commons maybe? -- But|seriously|folks  12:10, 17 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
OK, I see them in your contribs. Interesting question. The charts are definitely useful but have some major deficiencies: They are in a format that cannot be easily edited, they lack citations and may include OR and they contain erroneous information. We're not allowed to withdraw licenses, especially where others have uploaded modified versions. I recommend that you nominate them for deletion (all in one nom), explain that you are the original creator and set forth the deficiencies. I would certainly support deletion under the circumstances. Please let me know what you think of this idea. -- But|seriously|folks  05:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

hi

edit

Been playing with English monarchs family tree ... what do you think? Victuallers (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)Reply


Family trees

edit

What font did you use to do the family tree? And what font size? I am creating a huge project linking the royal families of Europe based on your diagrams. Also what are your sources? User talk:thelivinglegend —Preceding comment was added at 17:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Speedy deletion of Image:NunoAlvaresPereira.jpg

edit
 

A tag has been placed on Image:NunoAlvaresPereira.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:NunoAlvaresPereira.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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Sdrtirs (talk) 01:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Image source problem with Image:JoaoVIPortugal.jpg

edit
 
Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:JoaoVIPortugal.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 13:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Image source problem with Image:NunoAlvaresPereira.jpg

edit
 
Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:NunoAlvaresPereira.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 14:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Image source problem with Image:Tavora.png

edit
 
Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Tavora.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 16:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Unspecified source for Image:Anne-genevieve.jpg

edit
 

Thanks for uploading Image:Anne-genevieve.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly hi! 07:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply


Image source problem with Image:Rainytree3.jpg

edit
 
Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Rainytree3.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 21:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)Reply


Image source problem with Image:Myoffice.jpg

edit
 
Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Myoffice.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sdrtirs (talk) 21:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

File:LouisFrancisIConti.jpg missing description details

edit
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:LouisFrancisIConti.jpg is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers. If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:14, 5 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

File source problem with File:LouisFrancisIConti.jpg

edit
 
File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:LouisFrancisIConti.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

File:France-1stCarolingians.png missing description details

edit
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:France-1stCarolingians.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:13, 13 July 2009 (UTC)Reply


File:France-2ndCapet.png missing description details

edit
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:France-2ndCapet.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)Reply


File:France-3rdValois.png missing description details

edit
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as File:France-3rdValois.png is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors to make better use of the image, and it will be more informative for readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:22, 13 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Kings of England family tree listed at Redirects for discussion

edit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Kings of England family tree. Since you had some involvement with the Kings of England family tree redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Bill Oversixty (talk) 15:09, 8 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Family trees software?

edit

Hi, what software do you use t make your family trees? Thanks. --O'Dea (talk) 01:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

WikiProject Dacia

edit

Hi, I saw that you collaborated on articles related to Dacia and thought this could be of interest: WikiProject Dacia is looking for supporters, editors and collaborators for creating and better organizing information in articles related to Dacia and the history of Daco-Getae. If interested, PLEASE provide your support on the proposal page. Thanks!!--Codrinb (talk) 04:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

File:French-monarchsBourbon.png needs authorship information

edit
Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:French-monarchsBourbon.png appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

  • If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: {{subst:usernameexpand|Muriel Gottrop~enwiki}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
    or use the {{own}} template.
  • If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.
If you have any questions please see Help:File page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:51, 28 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Proposed deletion of List of drowning victims

edit
 

The article List of drowning victims has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable intersection of topics. Several irrelevant examples, no sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 21:05, 7 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Counts of Leuven

edit

Counts of Leuven, which you created, has been nominated to be moved. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments here. Moonraker (talk) 06:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Nomination of Roman usurper for deletion

edit
 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Roman usurper 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/Roman usurper until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. ReformedArsenal (talk) 19:30, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Nomination of List of Roman usurpers for deletion

edit
 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Roman usurpers 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/List of Roman usurpers until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. ReformedArsenal (talk) 19:32, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Notice of change

edit

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that you will not longer be able to request restoration of the tools because of your prior inactivity. You have until December 30, 2012 to request restoration or else the policy will prevent you from doing so in the future; you would need to seek a new WP:RFA. Until December 30, you can file a request at WP:BN for review by the crats. Thank you. MBisanz talk 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

(delivered by mabdul 22:15, 3 December 2012 (UTC))Reply

Nomination of List of unusual deaths for deletion

edit
 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of unusual deaths 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/List of unusual deaths (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Horologium (talk) 04:30, 13 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Nomination of List of unusual deaths for deletion

edit
 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of unusual deaths 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/List of unusual deaths (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. pbp 00:29, 25 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Nomination of List of unusual deaths for deletion

edit
 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of unusual deaths 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/List of unusual deaths (7th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 16:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Nomination of List of unusual deaths for deletion

edit
 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of unusual deaths 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/List of unusual deaths (7th nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 17:32, 25 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Your account will be renamed

edit

01:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

edit

16:39, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

edit

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) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Please claim your upload(s): File:BrittanyDukes.png

edit

Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as {{own}}, amending the {{information}} added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add |claimed=yes to the {{Media by uploader}} or {{Presumed self}} tag(s) if present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transferred to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:13, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please claim your upload(s): File:BrabantDukes.png

edit

Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as {{own}}, amending the {{information}} added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add |claimed=yes to the {{Media by uploader}} or {{Presumed self}} tag(s) if present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transferred to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:14, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please claim your upload(s): File:LorraineDukes.png

edit

Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as {{own}}, amending the {{information}} added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add |claimed=yes to the {{Media by uploader}} or {{Presumed self}} tag(s) if present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transferred to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:35, 9 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please claim your upload(s): File:FlandersCounts.png

edit

Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as {{own}}, amending the {{information}} added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add |claimed=yes to the {{Media by uploader}} or {{Presumed self}} tag(s) if present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transferred to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:38, 10 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please claim your upload(s): File:HainautCounts.png

edit

Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as {{own}}, amending the {{information}} added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add |claimed=yes to the {{Media by uploader}} or {{Presumed self}} tag(s) if present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transferred to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:39, 10 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please claim your upload(s): File:HollandCounts.png

edit

Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as {{own}}, amending the {{information}} added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add |claimed=yes to the {{Media by uploader}} or {{Presumed self}} tag(s) if present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transferred to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:40, 10 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Proposed deletion of File:UK-Stuartonwards.png

edit
 

The file File:UK-Stuartonwards.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned, unlikely to be useful.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~ Rob13Talk 14:36, 16 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Nomination of Roman usurper for deletion

edit
 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Roman usurper 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/Roman usurper (2nd nomination) 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. GPinkerton (talk) 00:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Invitation

edit
 
You're invited to join WikiProject Phoenicia's Ancient Carthage task force

You appear to be someone who may be interested in joining WikiProject Phoenicia's Ancient Carthage task force. Please accept this friendly invitation from a member of the project.
I can't wait for us to work together! ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 12:25, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
Reply

Let's go!
 

The article List of people on the postage stamps of the Philippines has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced , unused, unmaintained, your bog standard "list of people on the postage stamps of X"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 16:09, 25 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Nomination of List of people on the postage stamps of the Philippines for deletion

edit
 
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of people on the postage stamps of the Philippines 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/List of people on the postage stamps of the Philippines 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.

Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 15:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)Reply