SimonMayer

Welcome

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)

Fix spelling and grammar

More... • Learn how

Fix wikilinks

More... • Learn how

Update with new information

More... • Learn how

Expand short articles

More... • Learn how

Check and add references

More... • Learn how

Fix original research issues

More... • Learn how

Improve lead sections

More... • Learn how

Add an image

More... • Learn how

Translate and clean up

More... • Learn how

Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.

Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.

You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.

If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Again, welcome! - UtherSRG 20:35, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

200,000

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that according to the village pump, you are the creator of the 200 000th article on the English wikipedia (specifically Neil Warnock). Congratualtions. :)

Go Pilgrims, oggy oggy oggy and all that, fabiform | talk 01:53, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Football pages

Hi. I noticed that you contribute to the football related pages - in particular on the Plymouth Argyle F.C. page. Do you know of any plan to do a common format for the English league teams? I'm wondering whether to start a specific project - there's quite a difference between the various team pages at the moment. I'm still quite new here, so I'd be grateful for any comments before I try to start Jim 00:21, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

p.s. As a Swindon Town F.C. fan, I you have my grudging congratulations for last Saturday - you were lucky on the day, but easily the best team in the league this season :)

Hi Simon, thanks for getting my old Argyle page up to date. I am still in some shock over losing Luggy to Southampton. Never mind, 3 points at Peterborough tonight would be nice :) user:sjc

Hi Simon, we were truly awful last night; fortunately Peterborough were even more awful than we were. a propos the 100 Legends I have a signed copy of Andy Riddell's book, but frankly the list is contentious and not really imo encyclopaedic. a good book nevertheless. --Sjc

You seem to have fallen sadly behind on the Plymouth Argyle F.C. season 2004-05 page! --Bob Palin 19:07, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

nbsp

Umm, can you tell me why you are adding non breaking space redirects for a range of football teams? I presume there's a reason, but I'm blessed if I can see it. --Tagishsimon 22:24, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Okay. I deeply don't understand. You've created a table which literally says "Bradford&nbspCity&nbspF.C.", and because of this you've created 101 new pages called things like Bradford&nbspCity&nbspF.C., rather than changing the items in your table to read "Bradford City F.C.", which would link as Bradford City F.C.. Don't get me wrong; I'm not that concerned. It just strikes me that the table as is is, err, rather odd, and the solution, whilst not being particularly harmful to the Wikipidea, doesn;t actually solve the problem. Unless of course you prefer to read things like "Bradford&nbspCity&nbspF.C.". --Tagishsimon 22:52, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments on User:JimClark/TestStub. The nbsp thing is a bit fiddly, but seems the best way to control the table wraps. I also removed the 'F.C' since it's obvious that these are football teams being linked too. One comment on User:SimonMayer/Useful/Football League team tables - it doesn't look right in my Firefox browser. I think the ampersand-nbsp needs a trailing semi colon to be valid HTML. Jim 13:48, Mar 24, 2004 (UTC)

Okay. Now I understand what your table problem was. I guess I still don't understand why chose to make lots of redirect pages, rather than use a link in the format ((Liverpool F.C.|Liverpool&npsp;F.C.)). There you go. --Tagishsimon 00:23, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi Simon, I've just noticed you've been putting a table of all the First Division teams in each teams' page. This looks incredibly messy -- did you not consider creating a MediaWiki article, Template:English League First Division Clubs for example? You could then include it in each article by saying {{msg:English League First Division Clubs}} -- and you'd only have to edit that at the end of each season to reflect promotions and relegations! -- Arwel 02:29, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

In fact, I just have created that article, just to see how easy it would be! Arwel 02:33, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Arwel beat me to it! I made Template:English Premier league and Template:English Division One before reading his comment above. Jim 12:21, Mar 25, 2004 (UTC)

Hi. Simon as someone who contributes to football articles, I thought you might want to take a look at football (unqualified). This page has received quite a lot of attention recently. I had written some stuff on the history of football some time ago but got bored with the subject. But user:Grant65 began to add some historical detail to the football article I merged them together and, and we have been cooperating on working on that article. I just thought you might like to look at the article and fine tune it, if you feel it necessary. I think it is coming close to being a candidate for a featured article (just needs some pictures). Mintguy (T) 21:17, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Association Football

Simon, you have been busy changing all the references to use this obscure even if accurate term - was there any discussion of it somewhere? I know there doesn't have to be but I'm curious. Bob Palin 22:59, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Simon and Bob. The name football (soccer) was agreed after a very lengthy discussion. It was also agreed that where no ambiguity occurs football (unqualified) could be used. Please see Talk:Football_(soccer)/(archive_1) language Talk:List of footballers (archive 1) Talk:List of footballers (soccer) (archive 2). Mintguy (T)

BTW when I emailed FIFA, they said the sport was officially "football" (no qualification). But when I emailed the FA they said -

Hi,

Our official publication on the laws of the sport, updated every June, is called "Laws of Association Football". On that basis it could be said that "Association Football" is the official name of the sport.

However, I don't think there is any dispute that, in common parlance, we call it merely "football". There is a distinction now between "football" and "rugby" to follow a previous distinction between "Association Football" or "the Association game" and "Rugby Football" or "the Rugby game".

Interestingly, you allude to the fact that the sport's original rules or laws were not expressly "for Association Football" or "for the Association game", i.e. not expressly within those rules or laws. I believe they were understood as rules or laws for that form of football - bearing in mind that there were many forms before 1863 - which the new "Football Association" had created. So it was "Association Football" in the sense of "Association's Football".

"Association" quickly abbreviated to "soccer" (or "socker") in public school slang but the term is, in my experience, rarely seen or heard now. Not in this country, anyway.

So where does that leave us? Well, Rule 1 of the "Rules of The (Football) Association" includes the line: "All Clubs and Affiliated Associations shall play and/or administer football in conformity with these Rules and also (a) the Laws of the Game and (b) the Statutes and Regulations of FIFA and UEFA".

We call it "football" but its official name is "Association Football".

Regards,

David Barber

Library

Well I was holding out for football (anything but soccer was my original opinion) to be where association football should reside and I became entrenched in this position (as you do) because Britannica etc.. have the association game at football, eventually football (soccer) was agreed as a compromise (I wasn't happy at the time, but grew to accept it) it was felt that association football was too uncommon a term to use (I was arguing this myself because I wanted it at football, and I believed that association football wasn't the official name (FIFA say it isn't the FA say it is) becase there's no reference to Association Football (or Soccer) in the LOTG. The football (unqualified) page is now much stronger than it was. Some people wanted it just as a disambiguation page. I'm now reasonably happy that it's a decent article. Anyway I agree it is clumsy, and maybe on reflection we should move it to association football, but I'd rather not stir up a hornets nest again. All these arguments seem rather silly now. Mintguy (T)

Ken Doherty

Hi Simon, I'm working on some biographies of snooker players. I see you created a stub for Ken Doherty. Do you know who the second Ken Doherty is (the engineer)? I'm tempted to remove him, as I can't find any reference to him elsewhere. --Auximines 12:49, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

David Bates

Hi - Simon, I'm going to remove David Bates from the list of requested sports articles; you had added him a while ago, but I'm guessing this was the groundsman/cricketer who's now got a new page. If it's someone else you had in mind, feel free to re-add to the requests. MisfitToys 08:14, May 6, 2004 (UTC)

Euro 2004

Latest comment: 20 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi Simon - On the Euro 2004 page, I have added Announced team squads to the page with links to the Swedish and English squads. Personally, I am not convinced they are in the right place as they are respectively at: 2004 European Football Championship/Sweden and 2004 European Football Championship/England. I do think they should come under 2004 European Football Championship but not entirely sure how... Any advice/action welcome - Calexico (Talk) 16:30, 17 May 2004 (UTC)Reply

Grimsby Town F.C.

Has someone had at you for the naming of the football club pages? Wikipedia's naming convention - which I'm way too lazy to find & link to here - would tend to suggest the full name should be used. I note that someone started a rather grim Grimsby Town Football Club entry, which I've recently NPOVd, hence discovering the wretchedness of the current naming of all the other club pages. I've got to suggest that if you want to prevent duplicate pages being added, you need to think in terms of adding a couple or more redirects per page - e.g. Manchester United -> Manchester United F.C. , Manchester United Football Club -> Manchester United F.C. . If you have to do this, you might think about the naming convention from scratch, and maybe move all the pages. If this has been discussed to death somewhere, please point me at it. best wishes --Tagishsimon

Thanks. Excellent page! See Meta_comments_on_this_page. best wishes --Tagishsimon

Cricket category

Hi Simon,

I noticed you've been adding several English batsmen to Category:Cricket and Category:English batsmen. Just thought I would let you know that adding only to the English batsmen category will work fine - that is a sub-sub-sub-category of Cricket. Follow the category links and you will find it eventually! --Chuq 13:11, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Metropolitan Borough of Oldham

Hi. I've moved this back to Oldham (borough). I can certainly see a case for having all articles about boroughs and districts at District of X or Borough of X instead of X (district) or X (district). However, I dont' see a case for just Oldham being there.

Another factor is that [[Metropolitan Borough of Oldham|Oldham]] is significantly longer to type than [[Oldham (borough)|]].

Morwen - Talk 10:26, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Well, I would argue the full name is 'Oldham'. 'Metropolitan borough' is just a description of it, not part of the name. There's a list here - Wikipedia:List of English districts to disambiguate. If you want to suggest an alternative scheme and then do all the moves go and then fix all the links, please do. However I see no benefit in an article called [{Metropolitan Borough of Oldham]] existing along with one called St Helens (borough). Morwen - Talk 11:22, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Arts categories

Hi Simon,

I noticed that you were interested in arts categories for Syd Barrett. The discussion is mostly based around other articles, since the question largley boils down to 'how broad should a category be'. Policy is still being formed in this area and is at Wikipedia:Categorization.

I would encourage you to add to the discussion at

Wikipedia_talk:Categorization#.22What_belongs_in_a_category.22_guideline.3F

and

Category talk:Art#Problem_classifications

The original similar discussion is at;

Hope that helps. -- Solipsist 07:02, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Images

Hi, images like Image:Pig T-shirt.JPG that can't be used off of Wikipedia are heavily discouraged by Jimbo. See Wikipedia:village pump#Noncommercial-use only images are not acceptable. That discussion applies to non-commercial use only images, but your image would fall under that as well, since it can't be reused. I hope you consider releasing it under the GFDL. Thanks, [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 19:18, 2004 Aug 16 (UTC)

Where did you get Image:Plymouth Argyle squad 2003-04.jpg from? Images like this are rarely public domain. ed g2s • talk 12:29, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

List of songs..... =

Hi Simon. I responded to your comment on the Village Pump about List of songs with the name of a musical act in their title, I don't know if you saw it. I agree with your point of view. If you want help, I'll do what I can, though I'm not an admin. SteveBlade has already had a go at me there for responding to you - he obviously hasn't a clue how WP functions. He's only been here for a week or so, so maybe it's just a bit of newbieitis. That said, I leave "not biting the newbies" to others - if someone acts the way he has to me, then I will respond robustly. I have a feeling he'll either rapidly see the error of his ways or else will leave altogether. As far as the article goes, just be patient - in the long run it's nobody's work, and it will be deleted or amended according to the will of the community as a whole. Graham 05:24, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk) 19:33, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

Image tags

Hi! Thanks for uploading Image:Paul Sturrock.jpg. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks. Kbh3rd 03:53, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for uploading [[:Image:PAFC Badge00.JPG and Image:PAFC Badge00.jpg. I notice they currently don't have image copyright tags. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much, — Edwin Stearns | Talk 21:58, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

simple:List of people by name: ?

Saluton SimonMayer! I found you at eo:. When you read this probably all List of people by name: A, B, C etc. are properly linked / wrong links are fixed because they blocked the bots.
Are you interested to make the other lists at simple: as the existing simple:List of people by name: A and so on? You may use List of people by name: ? to have the direct edit links to 26 lists in 9 languages. Regards Gangleri | Th | T 12:38, 2005 Jan 29 (UTC)

Image copyright

Thank you for uploading Image:Brandon Flowers.JPG and for stating the source. However, its copyright status is unclear, so it may have to be deleted. If it is open content or public domain, please give proof of this on the image page. If the image is fair use, please provide a rationale. Thank you. --Ellmist 04:54, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

lots of edits, not an admin

Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. I see you're not tremendously active anymore, but if you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:16, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for creating this list. I appreciate the effort you've put into it and although my number of edits has declined, I do check my watchlist on a daily basis and so feel I could do a good job as an administrator, should there be any problems with pages I edit on or if someone were to contact me.
SimonMayer 21:32, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

audioscrobbler image

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

hey, just wondering what program you used to get the image that's on Audioscrobbler? i could do with a tool like that for recording the status of some web pages i'm working on --MilkMiruku 12:39, 10 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Invitation

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Would you like to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket? =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:57, 24 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia talk:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense/The Blue Coat School, Oldham

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You seem to be the major non-anonymous contributor to this article - Could someone please tell me why a lot of this info isn't in the main article (The Blue Coat School, Oldham)? Apart from the weird image in the first paragraph, shouldn't this be in our encyclo? And if the info is non-encyclopaediatic, i wouldn't describe it (with the exception of the weird image) as being a "Bad Joke" or "Deleted Nonsense" --[[User:4836.03|User:4836.03 Oh yeah! i am cool!]] 16:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)Reply

Image:Half_Caste_01.wav

Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Could you write a more descriptive description as to what this is? --Fastfission 03:14, 9 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Please check your WP:NA entry

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Greetings, editor! Your name appears on Wikipedia:List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct:

If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! BD2412 T 03:01, 17 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

LoL

Your editing times amuse me.

Tom. x

WikiProject on Sheffield Wednesday

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi SimonMayer. I am inviting you to join the WikiProject on Sheffield Wednesday, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of articles relating to Sheffield Wednesday F.C. You have received this message either because you have previously edited pages related to Sheffield Wednesday or you have stated on Wikipedia that you are a fan of the club. This is a fledgling WikiProject and we would welcome your contributions, please visit the project page for more details. Dan1980 11:39, 5 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Image:Wikipedia logo - distorted after scrolling page.JPG listed for deletion

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Wikipedia logo - distorted after scrolling page.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. Fritz S. (Talk) 09:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Image:Cryptic Message.PNG listed for deletion

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Cryptic Message.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. Nv8200p talk 15:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Unspecified source for Image:Brandon Flowers & Female Fan.JPG

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{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 05:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 05:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Image:Brandon Flowers.JPG listed for deletion

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Brandon Flowers.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. — Nv8200p talk 05:06, 7 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Unspecified source for Image:Neil Warnock 0000.jpg

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for uploading Image:Neil Warnock 0000.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{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 09:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 09:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Image:PAFC Badge00.JPG

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello SimonMayer, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:PAFC Badge00.JPG) was found at the following location: User:SimonMayer/Test/Plymouth Argyle F.C.. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not readd the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 03:59, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Little context in Category:Oldham

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Oldham, by Albireo223, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Oldham is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Oldham, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Category:Oldham itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 02:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Plymouth Argyle F.C. season 2003-04

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Plymouth Argyle F.C. season 2003-04, by PeeJay2K3 (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Plymouth Argyle F.C. season 2003-04 fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

because the subject matter is non-notable and can be found on any football website

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Plymouth Argyle F.C. season 2003-04, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Plymouth Argyle F.C. season 2003-04 itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 19:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Non-free use disputed for Image:Dennis_Taylor_0001.jpg

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thanks for uploading Image:Dennis_Taylor_0001.jpg. 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 after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 16:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Reply