This user may have left Wikipedia. GregManninLB has not edited Wikipedia since July 2013. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

User talk:GregManninLB1

Hi,

  I was in Modesto for a few hours and went up to the cemetery to get a photo of the marker for Florence Owens Thompson.  

There are two people named Florence Thompson listed at the cemetery. The one that is famous for the migrant mother image is listed as Florence Leona Thompson. According to the office personnel at the cemetery, the marker gets at least one visit a month. Florence Thompson's grave marker is next to her husband.

Her marker says:

FLORENCE LEONA THOMPSON

MIGRANT MOTHER: A LEGEND OF THE STRENGTH OF AMERICAN MOTHERHOOD SEPT. 1, 1903 - SEPT. 16, 1983

Her husband's marker says: GEORGE B. THOMPSON BELOVED HUSBAND AND FATHER 1902 - 1974

I have loaded the image into wiki as GRAVES 0F THOMPSON.jpg Feel free to add it to any article that needs the photo. John Pilge JP (talk)

I might be able to take a picture of the skinny house sometime in 2-3 weeks (no promises), but I very much doubt I'll make it to Marblehead, MA any time soon. --jacobolus (t) 00:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The O'Reilly Spite House is actually only about a mile away from me. I might go take its photo tomorrow, assuming good weather, if I can find someone to make the trek with me. --jacobolus (t) 05:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I saw your name at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers. Please photograph the Hollensbury Spite House at 523 Queen St, Alexandria, VA 22314 for spite house. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 23:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cool! I haven't had a request for ages. I have plans to head out that way on April 1 or 2 already, but if you would like it sooner, I should be able to go next Tuesday or Wednesday. (It's going to be a bit soggy and cloudy in the DC area until then.) Let me know how quickly you'd like it. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:20, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I apologize, but I had to delay my April 2 trip after being called out of town unexpectedly. I hope to take care of this early next week. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 19:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sheesh! I'm still waiting for the sun to come out. We've had nearly 2 weeks of clouds and rain, and it looks like it's going to continue for the next 10 days. There might be a break tomorrow that I can take advantage of. I'll keep you posted. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 08:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I'm looking forward to it. Have you seen the photos of the house on the Internet? GregManninLB (talk) 11:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, I hadn't seen those. It looks like there are four main contributors:

• MarieMcC of Alexandria Daily Photo (copyrighted under a Creative Commons license that doesn't allow commercial or derivative works, so it's not usable for us)
• John Kelly, Washington Post (no specific licensing, but surely requiring fee-based licensing)
• Michael Temchine, commissioned by New York Times, actual interview & inside photo shoot (surely requiring fee-based licensing)
• "Stella" of Paint Floats blog on Blogspot (implicit copyright and no licensing terms)

I still plan to try for some outside shots tomorrow morning, which currently looks like good weather. If it makes sense for the article (which I haven't read recently), I might be able to see if the residents/owners wouldn't mind a few inside and backyard shots like from the NYT article for our article. (But that would have to come later, of course, not something I could set up immediately.) Let me know. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 22:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't live near enough to Gainford, and I will not be going in that region for quite a while. Sorry i couldn't help you.  Sunderland06  01:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, Virginia City is in northern Nevada, hundreds of miles away and don't know when I can get there. (I just clarified my driving range on the photographers page.) Stan (talk) 03:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Got your request:

I saw your name at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers. For spite house, please photograph the Alameda Spite House, located at Broadway & Crist St, Alameda, CA 94501.[1] This shows a suggested photo angle. GregManninLB (talk) 00:45, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's a bit out of my way, but not horribly so, and the idea of a spite house is interesting enough that I might try to round up a field trip up that way sometime soon! Thanks for the suggestion. I'll see whether I can manage it. Elf | Talk 04:33, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done! It's a beautifully maintained house in a very friendly neighborhood. They apparently get a lot of tourists there. Elf | Talk 01:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will attempt to do this soon(ish), but I can't promise anything. At the moment I am putting off a lot of stuff for Wikipedia including ADCO because at current I have a ton of work to do from school. If I forget, don't hesitate to remind me. I should warn you, however, that I am not planning to go down to Durham and I will only take this if I am in the area. αѕєηιηє ^t/_c 09:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I really enjoyed your article on spite houses. Inspired by the red link I saw therein, I am writing an article on the Skinny House in Boston's North End. It's in my sandbox right now. If the weather is good tomorrow, I will try to trek over to the North End and get pictures to accompany both articles. Again, very nice work on your article! Thanks for calling these interesting houses to our attention. - House of Scandal (talk) 21:37, 22 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I took photos of the Skinny House today, added one to spite house, and wrote an article about that house itself. - House of Scandal (talk) 00:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Greg, thanks for adding the info box, etc. However, the completion date is off and I am not sure how to fix it. 1864? 1874? I didn't see an exact date in the source material but may have overlooked it. Best wishes, House of Scandal (talk) 16:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm afraid I moved to London a couple of years back, many hours away from County Durham now! Have updated my entry on that page. Stevekeiretsu (talk) 18:27, 23 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, GregManninLB. Unfortunately, my trips do not take me near Virginia City, Nevada. When I do travel to Nevada, I am usually in the southeastern tip. -- Kjkolb (talk) 20:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 25 March, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Spite house, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for the interesting article. --BorgQueen (talk) 11:16, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I saw your name at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers. Please photograph Tyler Spite House at 112 W Church St, Frederick, MD 21701 for spite house. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 23:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I should be going through that area on Friday -- I'll see if I can get some photos then. Cheers! --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 21:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

FYI, I got a number of photos; I just haven't had a chance to upload them yet. I'll leave a message as soon as they're up, which I expect should be sometime before this weekend. --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 03:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Uploading the images right now. Keep an eye on Category:Frederick, Maryland. Cheers! --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 04:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looking good! GregManninLB (talk) 14:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good work on organizing the photographs. I was able to upload a few photos that I've had lying around for a few months anyway. Now I've got a few lists to carry with me on places I'll be going soon. Elf | Talk 03:46, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not going to be back in the Seattle area until late May, so you might want to find someone else. —WAvegetarian (talk) 04:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey there. Sorry but I moved out of Guam back in 2001. I don't live there anymore and therefore I cannot take photos for you. Elektrik Blue (talk) 21:08, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, thanks for the tip about the Maunsel White map; I didn't know about it. I'm downloading it to my PC as I collect info about White. Sincerely, --Skb8721 (talk) 15:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd be more than happy to implement code if necessary, however, I currently have neither the time nor the patience to write any. I know very little about the workings of Reqphoto, so I'm probably not the best person to be adding 16 parameters and a nested option. If you find someone to write the code (or write it yourself), use an ((editprotected)) tag on the talk page and it'll flag an admin. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are all photo requests limited to states or counties? The reason I ask is, while Sally Kipyego is a student at Texas Tech University, she competes at running events throughout the nation. So, photo opportunites aren't limited to Lubbock County or to Texas. →Wordbuilder (talk) 18:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can add a photo location request for each location a Wikipedia photographer likely would find Sally Kipyego. As a student at Texas Tech University, a Wikipedia photographer in Lubbock County likely would find Sally Kipyego to snap her photo. Template:Reqphoto has other parameters, such as "|of=" where you can specify a particular type of photo (e.g., "|of=Kipyego at the beginning of a race." I added some more to the Sally Kipyego talk page. GregManninLB (talk) 18:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the tips. I appreciate your help. Keep up the great work. →Wordbuilder (talk) 19:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, I appreciate the heads up and will put forth an effort to be an active contributor.

Lothar the Terrible 18:58, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Why are you removing the photo request parameter from ((U.S. Roads WikiProject))? Please don't remove these, it is needed by the project to know which articles still need articles. --Holderca1 ^talk 17:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nevermind, I see that they still go into the same category. --Holderca1 ^talk 20:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greg, I see that you've added photo requests to the talk pages for several articles that, in fact, already have photos. I'm looking at the ones in Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Nevada County, California, a few of which do have photos--Empire Mine, Bridgeport covered Bridge, Malakoff Diggins, Englebright Lake--so just curious whether the request was for some other kind of photo? In which case you can use the "of" argument to specify what kind of photo (like ((reqphoto|....|of=the park outside the mine)) Elf | Talk 23:01, 30 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I though that those articles could use more photos. In the future, I'll use the "of" argument if I see that an article already has a photo. Thanks for the heads up. GregManninLB (talk) 00:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. Why did you put Category:Images of California in Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in California (diff) and also the other way around (diff)? I can't see a good reason for either of these edits. Together, they form a loop in the category structure, which is generally to be avoided; see Wikipedia:Categorization#Cycles should usually be avoided, especially the last paragraph. Same for Connecticut, and possibly other states that you have edited. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 11:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Those viewing Category:Images of California may see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in California and try to match existing images with requested photographs in California. Those viewing Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in California may see Category:Images of California try to match posted requests with existing images of California. "See also:Category:Foo" seems a better approach. Thanks, I'll make the changes. GregManninLB (talk) 14:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent! -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 15:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I made the changes. Hopefully that will fix the problem. I'll sit back a few days and see if any more pop up before continuing. Thanks again. GregManninLB (talk) 15:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you live near to Ivybridge, because Ivybridge Community College and Ivybridge for that matter both needs pictures. Bsrboy (talk) 22:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, I don't live near there. GregManninLB (talk) 22:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually, since the two major population centers of California are the Bay Area and Los Angeles, terms like "north", "central" and "south" are skewed compared with the actual geography of California. Therefore, Santa Cruz County would be considered Northern California by most Californians. Anyway, I think that having requests listed by county is good, but I personally choose not to make my location too specific for privacy reasons. Thanks, Kjkolb (talk) 03:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey! :) Dude, I actually created most of the Florida photo subcategories. I'm trying to get pics of the NRHPs in Florida, and it dovetails with that. I made some of the categories conglomerates (like the Panhandle) b/c some counties didn't have a lot of photo requests, or were likely too. But what you did is a good thing, and more ambitious than I was willing to do. Which is saying something! :) Ironically, I took a long Easter weekend trip thru the Panhandle, and have pics of a good number of places that I'll be able to cross off. But it's all good, man. :) Oh, and here are the results of my obsession. Still have a few hundred more of the Panhandle trip to upload, though. Thank good I discovered Commonist; only wish it'd been sooner. Anyway, cheers, mate! :) --Ebyabe (talk) 22:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. You seem to be going through the categories that WikiProjects are using to maintain their articles, depopulating the categories, and failing to notify anybody. Imagine my surprise when I went to check Category:Hawaii articles needing images only to find the category deleted and empty. Care to tell me what is going on? These articles are being watched and maintained by WP:HAWAII, and we have done quite a bit of work adding images. Other projects are watching their articles as well. Do you have any intention of telling anyone what you are doing or should I just spend the next three hours trying to catch up? —Viriditas | Talk 11:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excuse my error. You notified the project after you made your changes. We would be happy to categorize our articles into your chosen categories, but only through the project template. Looking at the articles you have categorized, most of them are inappropriately categorized. We will be happy to coordinate with photographers through our project. Your system will not work, and has been tried before in the past with nobody paying the slightest attention to these tags. I'm surprised you are ressurecting a proven failure. The best way to get images into these articles is to use the project assessment flags which will bring the categories to the attention of the project and any participating photographers. The average reader is not going to add photographs to the article or pay the slightest attention to the tag. In most cases, the active projects will add images to the articles they are maintaining. Your addition of maintenance categories to main categories is also problematic, as you are merging backend attention/maintenance categories with frontend browsing. This is the reason we have WikiProjects in the first place. Please use them to attain your goals. Separating the projects from the content they maintain is a freshly paved road to nowhere. —Viriditas | Talk 12:13, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok, I just reverted all of your changes. If your goal is to get at least one image into all of these articles, then I would like to welcome you to WP:HAWAII as we share the same goal. If, however, your goal is to force a system that has been proven not to work on to a WikiProject actively trying to improve these articles, then I would ask you to please take your system elsewhere. The best thing you can do, is try to implement a Project-wide template standardization for dealing with images. That way, all of the projects will be on board. I have never seen any evidence that the "reqphoto" system has resulted in anyone jumping forward with images. I always add images to article by project, as do most editors. If you have any evidence that the "reqphoto" system has worked in the past, I would like to hear it, but the fact is, working from the Project-level is the best route to take. —Viriditas | Talk 12:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And just in case you don't understand a word I'm saying, here's a very primitive worklist that gives the project a very quick view from the top:

• Review current photograph requests
• Determine scope of television-related articles
• Update WikiProject invitation templates
• Update geographic coordinates
• Sign up for Milestone Announcements
• Coordinate with WP:VOLCANO
• Update project layout and design
• Update Hawaiian island infobox

Take a look at Images needed. Your system fragments these categories, and makes it more complex, resulting in less efficiency and increased time to completion. We really don't need any maintenance tags aside from those in the project template. If someone wants to do the work, they can see that it needs to be done in the tag and in the main page. They don't need more categories by location, many of which cannot contain the articles accurately. All image requests are not locale-specific, in fact you can see by the above list, that many are not. So, how is your system useful? And with the rise of creative commons licensing and free image archives, why would I need to request a photographer anywhere? —Viriditas | Talk 13:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also want to add that the name is wrong. We really have no use for Wikipedia requested photographs. What we need is [Topic name] requested images. All images aren't photographs. Some are logos, maps, screenshots, drawings, book covers, and other things that can be scanned. It's redundant to call it Wikipedia - we all know where we are. What we need is precision; a topic name and an image request. Specifying just photographs isn't accurate. In your opinion, how is the name, Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Hawaii, superior to Category:Hawaii articles needing images? We aren't interested in photographs in Hawaii. What we want is to add images to Hawaii articles. This approach is inclusive. For example, how would adding a request for photographs in Hawaii help add images to articles on Ancient Hawaiian history? Or Hawaiian mythology? I can go on, but I hope you see my point. If all you are trying to do is recruit photographers, then create a centralized department and ask the projects to submit their image categories to you. I can think of a dozen more successful methods to obtain your goal than the one you are using. —Viriditas | Talk 13:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Response

I understand what you are trying to do, but in practice it doesn't work. Yes, it provides neat and tidy categories with dotted i's and crossed t's, but what we want is for people to actually add photographs to these articles. Take Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of food. This category has how many members? Hundreds. And is there anyone actively working on it? I can tell you, that without this category, I added many photographs to Hawaii-related food articles. That's because I was using the project to maintain these articles. When you just categorize for the sake of categorizing it doesn't help anyone. On the one hand, you've provided a place where people can go browse articles that need photographs. Great. But wouldn't it be more practical to decentralize this process, and ask the projects to take them over? In fact, that is the answer to all of our maintenance problems, from cleanup to references. But instead, we get people hiding these categories and centralizing requests. Two steps forward and three steps back. Do you want people to add images to these articles or do you just want to create categories to put articles in? Think about that. —Viriditas | Talk 14:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will personally attempt to fulfill every image request. The Hawaii project has less than 3000 articles, so that's actually reasonable. But looking at the image requests, I can see right away that most of them will never be fulfilled, nor are they ncessary. More importantly, why does an article need an image? Rick lay95, who is a member of the Hawaii WikiProject, has added image requests for obscure, defunct sports stubs. Perhaps he means to request a logo, I don't know, and I haven't had a chance to ask him. But as I said before, many image requests will never be fulfilled, or aren't necessary. —Viriditas | Talk 14:32, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok, I'll stop bugging you. Since you and others love this reqphoto system so much, if you can figure out a way to incorporate it into the project banner, I will support it. But we don't really need the location subcategories unless that could be automated in some way. I originally compromised and left your category in the template. But the more I thought of it, the more I could see how it wasn't really accurate. I'm sorry to say that I've left you a category redirect and that sort of defeats your whole purpose. Why haven't you just gone to the WikiProject Council to standardize the project templates? That way we won't have the banner bloat, and each project can maintain multiple articles needing images. —Viriditas | Talk 14:40, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. I'll look into that. GregManninLB (talk) 14:51, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi - User worldtraveller has left and won't be coming back (at least under that username). -- Rick Block (talk) 02:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I would like to invite you to a discussion at the link I've provided in the heading. Thank you. —Viriditas | Talk 07:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Viriditas. What ever you decided for the Hawaii Wikiproject is fine with me. GregManninLB (talk) 14:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greg, could you at least address some of my concerns? Like for instance, can you tell me whether the reqphoto project you are currently working on is an official WikiProject or being run under the auspices of the Photography WikiProject? If it is, I would be more than happy to implement a standarized parameter for use in the WPHawaii template, that will allow you folks to get the job done. I would even go so far as to allow you to use the project as a testing ground prior to rolling out the system to other projects. But, as I said in my lengthy comments, the current system you are using does not work and needs to change. Let the projects deal with identifying articles needing images and categorization, and concentrate on finding the photographers. As I asked on the category page, have you made any efforts to contact the 1700+ photographers listed on Wikipedia? Shouldn't we be spending our time tapping into that resource instead of spending countless hours adding useless categories? If you feel I am wrong on this, please let me know. All I want to do is help you achieve your goals. —Viriditas | Talk 08:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've added my name to several of the English lists, as requested. You might like to consider deleting Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Avon (county), since the county of Avon was abolished in 1996. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 15:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for adding your name. Also, I deleted the category. GregManninLB (talk) 03:33, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Code has been added. Please test it out to insure I didn't screw things up and revert to previous version if necessary. Thanks for the update. --Roswell native (talk) 16:33, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent addition. I envision this becoming very useful. I just added the parameter to the template documentation as well so others will hopefully know how to use it. Feel free to edit that explanation for clarity. I'll start using this parameter as I tag article project pages. --Roswell native (talk) 16:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I got your message about use of this template. Since you asked so politely (and because it is a good idea to combine the templates), I want to comply. :) See Template talk:WikiProject GeorgiaUS#Photo request feature for comments/suggestions that I just posted. doncram (talk) 21:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I declined it because it doesn't fall under the speedy criteria. WP:CSD#T3 does not cover redirects. For that you would have to go to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. On which I wouldn't really bother, since it's an old redirect it is possible that someone might still use it. Redirects are cheap. Garion96 (talk) 20:39, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greg, I ran across your categorization by counties in California for ((reqphoto)) and this template. First of all, I think it's a great idea, and I'm slowly working on making Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Illinois the same. However, wouldn't it be easier/possible to make the template a general template for use on all states, rather than just California? Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I'm not part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Illinois, so I don't want to speak for anyone from that group, but personally, I wouldn't be opposed to it. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sounds great. I've already semi-protected the template permanently, too. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 22:12, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, could you modify the template so that it automatically adds the proper categories? For example, the actual county category (Category:Cook County, Illinois) and the main photo request category (Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Illinois)? Or will this not work, because of the instances like Hawaii? Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 15:23, 12 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You suggestion of the speedy deletion of Template:Needtrans is bewildering. Your rationale is that it's a duplicate of Template:Translation and that the template is note being used. You are very much mistaken on both counts. The other template in question does not even resemble Template:Needtrans and besides, the template is used extensively on Pages needing translation into English. I will post these arguments on the template's talk page as well. I would also hope that you would also do the right thing and remove the deletion tag.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 13:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It has 21,279 transclusions. So, any vandalism or mistakes are distributed to 21,279 pages. Probably best that it wasn't reduced from full protection. If you write / test the code and are ready to have it go live, simply put an ((editprotected)) tag on the template talk page and an admin will be along to sync the page. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Instead of making hundreds of requests, please just make a list of the images you'd like to see edited, and make a single request somewhere like the administrator's noticeboard to ask for someone to do it. — Carl (CBM · talk) 16:07, 11 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. That seems a better approach. I'll do that from here on. GregManninLB (talk) 16:08, 11 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi GregManninLB. I have handled all your edit requests for the Category:Wikipedia image placeholders for image namespace. After some editing I decided to put the image description etc into a template ((protected generic image name)) that I then put on all those image pages. Now we can update the description of all those pages by simply editing that template. I have only semi protected the template so you can edit it. You might want to have a look and see if you want to add or change anything there. Also take a look at Wikipedia:Image file names since I added some description there.

By the way, I am going to test an alternative way to handle these "protected image-names", but I'll get back to you about that.

--David Göthberg (talk) 20:20, 12 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you sure this time?! Bencherlite^Talk 01:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done, no problem. I just wanted to make sure you weren't continuing to test out various things and accidentally requesting deletion whilst you were doing so! Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 01:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done. I don't know much about templates but couldn't see any problems, and it looks from your contribution history that you know more than me anyway! I was going to suggest getting an admin who knows about templates to make the change, but then thought "what the heck, it's only transcluded on less than 25,000 pages, it's not exactly ((cite web)) we're talking about here" and went for it anyway... Keep an eye out for unexpected problems, won't you? Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 01:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You recently tagged Category talk:Needed-Class Christian music articles for speedy deletion. This page is a part of the Christian Music Wikiproject. Category is linked to ((cat class|topic=Christian music)). It is currently empty because no articles are currently tagged as "class needed." Absolon S. Kent (talk) 19:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you give me an example of Christian music articles that would be tagged as Needed-Class? Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 19:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don't be silly! If the article existed it would not be needed class, it would be stub, start, B, etc class.Pyrotec (talk) 19:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would have to refer you to the project's assessment team. The category is listed as a banner class parameter and is defined as "for articles that do not yet exist but have been identified as subjects that should be covered; adds articles to Category:Needed-Class Christian music articles." I'm assuming they use it for the projects to-do list. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! Local talk pages of commons images aren't usually deleted, although I admit I don't see the use of just a Wikiproject tag. east.718 at 01:32, April 15, 2008

I think I see what you are doing with the class categories, but you have FL as a main cat and List as an na cat. Is that right? If I have what you're doing wrong, fair play, but I think List is a part of the assessment scales now and picked up by the bot. Hiding T 09:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Apparently, list articles either are List-Class or FL-Class (featured list class). See Wikipedia:Featured lists and Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists. List articles are different than prose articles, which accounts for the modified quality assessment scale. I don't think there are plans for FC-Class (Featured Current-Class) articles and FF-Class (Featured Future-Class) articles. Category:Articles by quality is a subcategory of Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments. Wikipedia 1.0 assessments would not FA, GA, B, Start, or Stub rate an article different because it contains Current event information or Future event information. Category:Current-Class articles and Category:Future-Class articles just do not seem to fit within this direct subcategory of Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments. I think the categories "Current-Class articles" and "Future-Class articles" should be renamed, but I would settle for them not being categorized within a direct subcategory of Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments since Wikipedia 1.0 assessments does not separately deal with current event and future event articles. GregManninLB (talk) 15:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, I see where you are coming from/. I see it was a mis-sort on List-Class articles. I've reverted myself on the future and current class cats because it's not the sort of thing worth arguing about. All the best. Hiding T 07:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See Template talk:Reqphoto#Improvements for inX

Sorry for the late follow-up on your request. Hope you like it! eDenE 19:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I responded on the template talk page. eDenE 15:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You might want to think about joining the WikiProject Photography project. They seem to be inline with what you're trying to do. I've already added ((WikiProject Photography)) to each state's category talk page. Also, there is a bot out there (PhotoCatBot) that might be able to help. Looking at it's creator's user page, he has some of the same ideas you have. I'm still occasionally and slowly tolling away at the Illinois requests pages. About halfway through the Cs. Such progress. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 16:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It make sense to do away with the ((reqphoto)) altogether, however how would you handle an article that is part of both WikiProject Illinois and WikiProject Chicago, and it's photo "request" is from the ((WikiProject Chicago)) template? Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 18:15, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since WikiProject Illinois is a parent project of WikiProject Chicago, WikiProject Illinois's banner should display and categorize the photo request and WikiProject Chicago template should be changed to only categorize the photo request as needed by WikiProject Chicago. For now, I don't see any problem with using both templates to the fullest. GregManninLB (talk) 14:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sounds good. One other question (for now). Is it necessary to keep the Category:Illinois articles needing images? It's automatically added with the ((WikiProject Illinois)) template, too. It seems redundant. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The county sorts do not have all Illinois articles in one category. Category:Illinois articles needing images is how the WikiProject keeps track of all articles within its scope that need images. I explained it here. GregManninLB (talk) 14:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, I'm not quite following this logic. By adding in the parameter "|imageneeded=yes|in=Cook County, Illinois" to the ((WikiProject Illinois)) template, it adds the talk page to two categories: Category:Illinois articles needing images and Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Cook County, Illinois. That seems redundant to me, with the former slowly becoming one giant category. I don't see why WikiProject Illinois needs that category at all anymore when it will soon be sorted into the subcategories. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Jauerback. I didn't remember that I was the one to create Category:Illinois articles needing images. I have no idea whether WikiProject Illinois needs such a category. I was trying to make their template consistent with other state categories. However, I just populated Category:Articles needing images and see that there are not many U.S. state categories for articles needing images. This all goes to the language used in the templates, categories, etc. "Requested" is favored over "needed". I'll get rid of Category:Illinois articles needing images]]. GregManninLB (talk) 15:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First of all, thanks for again for all of your work on this. Secondly, you should be aware of this. You can review what categories he's deleted here. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 13:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(outdent) Wow, your HowtoreqphotoinUS master template idea really save the day as it allowed adding ((Wikipedia category)) to all the categories in one post. Thanks! I had contacted MZMcBride on 9th, who then responded here. But that's about it. GregManninLB (talk) 14:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:reqcover has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Traveler100 (talk) 10:09, 19 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, can I just ask why you want this category deleted? It looks useful. Thanks, Mallanox 16:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cool, ok. Thanks Mallanox 16:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greg, I've given you rollback capabilities to help you with reverting edits when you need to. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 00:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks! It should come in handy when I make multiple mistakes in a row. GregManninLB (talk) 00:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you are here about WikiProject Military history/Examples, please take the appropriate action. I tried my best, but it just didn't go like I planned. Thanks! GregManninLB (talk) 02:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I am me :) I could do it, and I already intended to do it, but I am not sure when could I do it. I'll try over the weekend. Nikola (talk) 16:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can do that already (but you do need to know regular expressions). Search for ^John.*Smith$ Nikola (talk) 17:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done. Nikola (talk) 07:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Version 0.5 articles by category and Category:Version 0.7 articles by category are being added to article space categories. These belong in Wikipedia space only. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 16:25, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Alan. The version 0.5, 0.7, and 1.0 categories seemed to lack structured organization. Some were not categorized and there seemed to be some duplicate categories (e.g., Category:Held Wikipedia 0.7 Candidates and Category:Version 0.7 Held articles). I arranged everything under Category:Wikipedia Release Version as a top category. You can get an overview of the entire structure here. Please feel free to rearrange as you see fit. Best. GregManninLB (talk) 16:36, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there, and sorry for taking so long to get back to you (it's not even as though I've been particularly busy :S) about this template. I've had a look at the template and it seems fairly standard; I'm not sure, however, what you were trying to achieve in some cases and/or what you think's gone wrong. If you could clarify what you were trying to achieve, I can certainly see what I can do. Happy‑melon 17:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Romance-speaking states of Europe has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.--DerRichter (talk) 02:51, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I'm sending this to you because you participated in the Centralized discussion on image placeholders that ended on 23 April.

That discussion must produce a conclusion.

We originally asked "Should the addition of this box [example right] be allowed? Does the placeholder system and graphic image need to be improved to satisfy policies and guidelines for inclusion? Is it appropriate to some kinds of biographies, but not to others?" (See introduction).

Conclusions to centralized discussions are either marked as 'policy', 'guideline', 'endorsed', 'rejected', 'no consensus', or 'no change' etc. We should now decide for this discussion.

Please read and approve or disapprove the section here: Conclusion --Kleinzach (talk) 11:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please note this message conforms to WP:CANVASSING and has not been sent to anyone has not already participated in the centralized discussion.

Hello. I see you added cats for the images attributed to this film. Sorry. But they are all taken in Argentina and NOT Bolivia. What made you think they are from Bolivia? Did you read the Bolivia (film) article? Mmmmmm. Inquiring minds want to know........ My best -- Luigibob (talk) 22:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've filled in the parts I could, added some maps, and moved the list to article space so that other users can find it more easily and work on it. The redlinks are helpful to users in two ways: first, along with the blue links they show Wikipedia's coverage of the subject (and may save readers from typing terms into the search box for nothing); second, the redlinks provide a to do list of articles needed for the subject - Wikipedia:WikiProject Ecuador may find the list useful for this.

Since you are much more familiar with that WikiProject than me, I'd like to make a request. Please inform the project members of the list, and that it serves as a table of contents for Ecuadorian topics on Wikipedia, and that their help is needed to create the redlinked articles as well as further develop the list. I feel you will be able to determine the best way to do this - the goal being recruiting ongoing help on that list and the redlinked articles.

I look forward to your reply.

The Transhumanist 06:49, 1 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I removed the non-article categories from Template:maths rating, including a few you just added. I thought I should explain what's up there.

Unlike other wikiprojects, the math project does not use this template to tag every page related to mathematics. Its only purpose is to collect data about articles, which is then collated by my bot and collected at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mathematics/Wikipedia_1.0. This is why none of the following categories has previously been created:

• Category:Non-article mathematics pages
• Category:Category-Class mathematics pages
• Category:Disambig-Class mathematics pages
• Category:Image-Class mathematics pages
• Category:Non-article mathematics pages
• Category:Redirect-Class mathematics pages
• Category:Template-Class mathematics pages

The mathematics project also has a List of mathematics articles that does not depend on Template:maths rating at all.

I don't think very many mathematics editors have the template on their watchlist. Discussion about the template is ordinarily held at WT:WPM. — Carl (CBM · talk) 10:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Carl. Although Category:Disambig-Class mathematics pages has not been created, Category:Mathematical disambiguation has. Over three hundred WikiProjects use the disambiguation talk page to categorize their disambiguation pages. See Category:Disambig-Class articles. Category:Mathematical disambiguation takes the unusual step of using the disambiguation page to categorize. There seems to be no reason that Math disambig pages should be an exception by using the disambiguation page to categorize. As indicated in List of mathematics topics, WikiProject Mathematics uses the meta list List of mathematics categories as a way of keeping track of mathematics category pages. To be consistent, the information in Category:Mathematical disambiguation should be placed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/List of mathematics disambiguation pages to keep track of mathematics disambiguation pages and the disambiguous pages tagged with ((mathdab)) instead only should be tagged with ((disambig)). I posted this at WT:WPM per your suggestion. GregManninLB (talk) 14:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll respond on WT:WPM. Thanks for posting there, it will get a lot more eyes on the discussion. — Carl (CBM · talk) 14:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nice work on getting that set up. The importance category doesn't seem to be working right though, e.g. ocean sunfish isn't showing up in top importance (personally I don't think it should be given top importance either, but it is). Richard001 (talk) 08:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Richard. I fixed the importance category and this edit fixed the additional brackets problem. I had requested Happy-melon's assistance with the additional brackets problem. He posted an alternate code. I don't belong to the Fishes project, so please feel free to decide how you want to proceed with the project banner code. As for top importance, I gave ocean sunfish a top importance only because it was an FA article. Please feel free to revise any importance or quality rating as you see fit. Best. GregManninLB (talk) 17:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The quality of an article shouldn't really have any influence on importance. The idea is that the most important articles for a project are the ones people should try to work on the most. I suppose you could also argue that being an FA does make an article slightly more important as more people are likely to look at it, but I don't think an article's current quality rating should really be a consideration when assessing importance for any project. As for biological projects, individual species are almost never going to be of very high importance, though some of the better known ones could certainly be bumped up to mid or perhaps even high importance if there is reason to.

I'm not a member of the fish project either. I tend to work more on general biology subjects like ecology, evolution, genetics etc. Richard001 (talk) 06:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, I only drop by Wikipedia occasionally these days (mostly when I see something that needs fixing), and so I have no idea what the latest updates on this are. Apologies, and hope you find something. It may be useful to look at the history of the main "Guide" page, from which I originally pasted the technical notes, and see who was working on them before I pasted them where I did (since I didn't create most of that content).

HTH,

-- TimNelson (talk) 10:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Greg, please take a look at ((WPBiography/testcases)) and let me know if that's what you wanted (as far as getting the needs-infobox, needs-photo, and needs-persondata boxes inside the nested table). Let me know what other changes/styles you would like and I can do those too. Later tonight I'm going to look at taking care of ((WikiProjectBannerShell)) to see if I can address your comments about it. It has a bunch of other problems that need to be finally fixed, so I might do a major overhaul on it soon. --CapitalR (talk) 00:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just made the changes to ((WPBiography)) to get the needs-photo, needs-infobox, and needs-persondata information inside the collapsible table when it is nested. Please let me know if there are other changes you would like. --CapitalR (talk) 15:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thankyou your efforts on Wikipedia:WikiProject Genetics *:) LeeVJ (talk) 00:38, 8 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Didn't know you if you wanted to give your opinion here or not. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

About your request for work by a bot, could you give me a precise list of categories? Just, the general Category:Genetics has categories in it I don't think you want tagged. So, if you could give me a precise list, it would be most helpful. Thanks. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 06:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't agree with this change. Reqimage should redirect to its equivalent and the uncommented change from reqimage to reqphoto was clearly improper in these cases. A musical score is not an "equation." Badagnani (talk) 05:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes indeed, I am intending to act on this. I haven't abandoned it. Thanks and regards.--Kleinzach (talk) 09:07, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On your idea of asking an admin to close the centralized discussion, can you show me where and how this has been done in the past with centralized discussions? Thanks again. --Kleinzach (talk) 09:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. The info about top and bottom plates is useful. Let's keep in touch and see how it works out. (BTW your note about ((Images needed)) did come up in the discussion). Best. --Kleinzach (talk) 23:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've now gone ahead on your suggestion and asked for an admin to close the discussion. I've done this [[2]]. I'm not sure if this is the right place but perhaps they'll tell me if it's not! Best. --Kleinzach (talk) 01:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I used the top/bottom archiving tags and they were removed [3]. I've reverted but I expect it will be changed. --Kleinzach (talk) 23:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please be careful to check the What links here box. After spending a long time yesterday bringing the provinces and cantons of Ecuador up to date yesterday, it is frustrating to see redlinks appearing on those pages already. Given how far out of date it was, am I to take it that WP:ECU is not the most active of projects? Kevin McE (talk) 09:02, 25 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not your error: did you not see my edit note when I came back to strike that bit out? Kevin McE (talk) 16:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See Article Rescue Squadron. GregManninLB (talk) 02:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

— From User talk:Gawaxay

Thank you for identifying my error. I searched the directory and found nothing similar to my idea. I seem to have overlooked that project. It's possible (but unlikely), though, that it's not listed. --Gawaxay (talk • contribs • count) 18:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your note. The project can't be Grinding mills as that would exclude drainage mills, saw mills, trip hammers powered by water, stamp mills etc. etc. Other option is three wikiprojects - Windmills, Watermills and Animal Engines - but I'd rather not go that way. Would a solution be to create a new head category of Mills, which would then give us out WIkiproject. Mjroots (talk) 04:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, looks like it's going to have to be three WikiProjects then. In that case, WikiProject Windmills is going to get most support. Mjroots (talk) 06:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Greg. On Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals you often say that one category or another does have enough member articles to warrant a project. I was just wondering, what do you consider to be enough, and how do you arrive at that number? Cheers! – ClockworkSoul 07:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh, I understand that's what you're doing, but how do you decide that the number you find is enough or not enough? – ClockworkSoul 07:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, in your numerous recent postings on Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals, you're confusing a great many people, including me. Are you suggesting that in the Embryology section, for example, that an Embryology effort must exist as a task force of a currently nonexistent Developmental Biology project, itself a child of a nonexistent Biological Processes project, in turn a child of a nonexistent Reproduction project? That seems a little silly to me. I'm cross-posting this onto that above section, so I hope that you reply there. – ClockworkSoul 13:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Concerned

I'm a little concerned. I've never seen anybody else say anything supporting this before. May I ask where you've heard it, because it seems very alien to me. After all, this was never a condition of creating wikiprojects before. – ClockworkSoul 00:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not going to edit Wikipedia anymore. I can't stand it anymore. Kingjeff (talk) 18:45, 26 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have found the only link indicating Professor Fazal Haq Mir received the Sitara-e-Imtiaz, which is already in the article:

• http://www.pakturk.org/pages/qgold.html

Actually, this college is based in a small city of Quetta, where there is very less facility of internet to disperse information. Unfortunately, there is no official website of the recipients of Sitara-e-Imtiaz, atleast not in my knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plutonics (talk • contribs) 23:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks God, I found another link for Fazl Haq Mir or Fazl-e-Haq Mir, the principal of Tameer-e-Nau Public College, Quetta:

[*http://www.pakturkquetta.org/tr/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11&Itemid=1 http://www.pakturkquetta.org/tr/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11&Itemid=1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plutonics (talk • contribs) 23:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 8 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Manx Rumpy, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 03:35, 8 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your help on this article. Just curious, how did you access the Oregonian and the Daily Mail references? Do you have access to LexisNexis or something? howcheng {chat} 16:43, 8 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

BTW, would you mind approving this now that the source for the hook comes from a book? Thanks. howcheng {chat} 16:24, 9 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Addressed. Nousernamesleft (talk) 20:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Responded. You are correct (in fact, I fixed the article to reflect that as well), so would a hook including all three be appropriate? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You asked for a source for the hook, but there is one already there. I can't do any better since it is older and only available online through a subscription service (as are the rest of the sources in the article). However, this does not preclude it since there is no bias on Wikipedia against online/offline sources. Thanks. --Tom (talk - email) 12:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Furthermore, you can check the List of United States Senators from Maryland and see that he is the only Republican to serve three terms (6 years each, for 18 years total). --Tom (talk - email) 12:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There's an obstacle in your request. The article already relies very heavily upon one of its three sources, which is in fact a very short chapter (one page long) from a book. If I were to comply fully with your request and add the requested quote to the article itself, then that would place WMF in danger of violating the book authors' copyright by reproducing too much of the chapter. I have been at pains to avoid that pitfall and delayed article creation by several days while I contacted two people to search for more sources.

The concerns about copyvio that you're trying to address are very real and I thank you for your efforts. I fully appreciate them: I'm one of the people who's been dealing with the problem that caused the new increase in scrutiny. Although the new changes in procedure are mostly worthwhile, the kinks haven't been totally worked out yet and sometimes--in instances such as this--a request for additional quoted material may actually create copyright violation. I have no problem quoting the original passage at Template talk:Did you know, but to add that to the article itself would be improper. Respectfully, Durova^Charge! 16:41, 9 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. Perhaps I should just be patient, but I really would not like to see this expire before my eyes, so may I ask you to comment on my latest changes and see if what I have proposed is acceptable? Thank you. Biruitorul ^Talk 19:34, 9 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! I expanded the text on Cupid's Mistake, as per your DYK request. Please re-review this to confirm the article makes the grade. Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 21:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P.S. The Google Books that you cited were not for the movie in question. Thanks!Ecoleetage (talk) 21:54, 9 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm hoping you might have enough copyright tag savvy to let me know what’s the best tag to use for a free image found on Flickr or a similar site? To be saved the time and hassle of hunting down the answer myself would be a boon. Thanks very much. - House of Scandal (talk) 20:53, 10 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Per this, I think one of the Template:Cc-by's such as Template:Cc-by-2.0 or Template:Cc-by-sa might work. The templates are listed at Category:Image copyright tags. GregManninLB (talk) 23:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I nominated an article that was created obn july 4th today. See here. Is there si anything you can do ? Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 17:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm fine with promoting the article, but the hook statement is uncited and that will need to be fixed first. Either that or a new hook will have to be found. Gatoclass (talk) 02:14, 13 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've added a cite in the lead. Thanks for this. -- Arvind (talk) 10:31, 13 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 11 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Michael Sharrett, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Congratulations! --PeterSymonds (talk) 21:21, 11 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for adding the fact about the origin of the term swizzle stick to the Rum Swizzle article. That's a very cool fact I won't forget. If you want to read a real "head scratcher" check out the deletion debate or the home page of the original creator. I can only imagine how he'd react if things weren't going his way! - House of Scandal (talk) 01:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Don't mean to step on your edits. If I did, sorry. I'll return to the article later so there's no conflict. - House of Scandal (talk) 16:31, 13 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not using Template:Afd/sandbox; it was just for a one time-debugging attempt. You might ask Sandstein, though. Thanks, MCB (talk) 18:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I did make a couple of changes to RumSwizzle.jpg, but I would like to know if there is a more suitable license tag for this image? –BuickCenturyDriver 23:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think your comments at the murder AFD have a typo that make them say the opposite of what you wanted (missing a not?) Hobit (talk) 12:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 16 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rum Swizzle, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 11:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have made a proposal at WikiProject Graphics. When you have a chance, please review it and comment. Thanks! ~ JohnnyMrNinja 07:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As a member of this WikiProject, your input is requested here before the outcome of this proposal is determined. Thanks. JPG-GR (talk) 16:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Greg, I saw your request for a script to change the color of your links faster, while editing. I have no idea about scripts, but I do know a quicker way to check links. If you are using Firefox, There is an add-on called Cooliris Previews that will open a link when you hover over it, instead of having to click through, allowing you to preview it before deciding to open it. If you do this, it automatically changes the link to a "viewed color", and it's quite useful for reading WP as well. You can get a quick review of a linked word or phrase without having to open a new tab, and switch to it.

There is also an add-on called URL link, which will open any selected text as a link (www.text.com .net .org etc.,or a search or in WP. It looks like that would be helpful to the IRC links problem for those not script savvy! Both should be available for Internet Explorer, and other browsers as well. Hope that helps. --Widgetiki (talk) 05:58, 2 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I added two images from a recent trip up to Nevada City. Does that satisfy your request? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 21:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not sure where to publicize this, but I'd like the community to look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inglewood,_California#Born_in_Inglewood. I've used thumbnails to replace the bullets and feel that it adds more zest to the page. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:31, 24 October 2008 (UTC) (P.S. That is not me; I am not that good-looking.)Reply[reply]

Hello. This is a very belated reply to a message you left on my talk page some months ago regarding the OTRS permissions for this image. To answer your question directly, at the end of the exchange the OTRS respondent concludes that "No further action will be necessary". Cheers (and apologies for the length of time that it's taken me to reply) --Michael Billington (talk) 09:15, 26 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry not to have answered earlier. Donno much about Galapagos, just choose this name for some personal reasons. Regards. --Oc.Gal. (talk) 02:46, 18 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, thanks. Sorry I didn't reply sooner, but I haven't been on Wikipedia in a long time, but wanted to say thanks anyway. Bsroiaadn^Talk 18:39, 12 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have nominated Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Howland Island (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Tim Pierce (talk) 16:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Reqphotoin has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Tim Pierce (talk) 23:26, 11 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I notice that this category you created is unpopulated (empty). In other words, no Wikipedia pages belong to it. If it remains unpopulated for four days, it may be deleted without discussion, in accordance with Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#C1. I'm notifying you in case you wish to (re-)populate it by adding [[Category:Version 1.0 Nominees]] to pages that belong in it.

I tagged the category. This will not, in itself, cause the category to be deleted. It serves to document (in the page history) that the category was empty at the time of tagging and also to alert other watchers that the category is in jeopardy. You are welcome to remove the tag if you wish. However, removing the tag will not prevent deletion of the category if it remains empty.

If you created the category in error, or it is no longer needed, you can speed up the deletion process by tagging it with ((db-author)).

I am a human being, not a bot, so you can contact me if you have questions about this. Best regards, --Stepheng3 (talk) 17:50, 15 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Guam village photo instructions has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Fayenatic (talk) 18:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Non-article Engineering pages, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 00:14, 13 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:WikiProject Serranilla Bank. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Serranilla Bank redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Kumioko (talk) 23:10, 28 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:WikiProject Kingman Reef. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Kingman Reef redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Kumioko (talk) 23:11, 28 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:WikiProject Navassa Island. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Navassa Island redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Kumioko (talk) 23:12, 28 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:WikiProject Palmyra Atoll. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Palmyra Atoll redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Kumioko (talk) 23:12, 28 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:WikiProject Bajo Nuevo Bank. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Bajo Nuevo Bank redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Kumioko (talk) 01:08, 29 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:WikiProject Jarvis Island. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Jarvis Island redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Kumioko (talk) 01:10, 29 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:WikiProject Baker Island. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Baker Island redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Kumioko (talk) 01:12, 29 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To replace the existing blurry, old image here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Miami/Header Add this, I couldn't get it to come out right even with a reduced size image. I don't do any sort of complex code, at all.

Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:39, 1 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bathing beauties no. 29.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 01:59, 22 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bathing beauties no. 30.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 01:59, 22 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Adams County, Idaho, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Kumioko (talk) 00:42, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have been mentioned at Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians. XOttawahitech (talk) 12:53, 2 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Unreferenced Fishes articles, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Launchballer 17:08, 30 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Geneticscur has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:44, 7 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Geneticsnom has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Geneticsprev has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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) 13:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Version 0.7 articles by quality, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 03:46, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Instructions for requested photographs in Hawaii has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:41, 16 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Genetics CoM has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:00, 11 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Bajo Nuevo Bank, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:28, 15 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Gray County, Texas requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:28, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Kent County, Texas requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:29, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Donley County, Texas requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:30, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Colegio Bernardo Valdivieso requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

no sources that say that the school exists

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Trains2050 (talk) 05:59, 26 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Richland County, Illinois requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:32, 10 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Bradford County, Florida requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:34, 3 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Sumter County, Florida requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:35, 3 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Requests for Engineering peer review requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:15, 13 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Requests for Fishes peer review requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:15, 13 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Old requests for Ecuador peer review requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Requests for Ecuador peer review requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:47, 14 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Stephens County, Georgia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:00, 15 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Requests for Genetics peer review requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 07:11, 17 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File talk:Ptecuador.jpg, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/File talk:Ptecuador.jpg and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of File talk:Ptecuador.jpg during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —S Marshall T/C 19:51, 14 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:HowtoreqphotoinEcuador has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 15:13, 3 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:WikiProject Connecticut/Example has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Q28 hope you pay attention to TFD 04:23, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:WikiProject Religion/Example has been listed at templates for discussion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Q28 (talk) 06:59, 26 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:WikiProject Football/Examples has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:37, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Henderson County, Texas indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:09, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Geelong indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:13, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Engineering past collaborations indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:03, 25 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:WikiProject Schools/Examples has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:12, 20 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1 § Category:WikiProject X members on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkltalk 09:33, 2 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Version 0.7 articles by category indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:16, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Glades County, Florida indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:08, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Release Version articles by category indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:08, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Wikipedia image placeholders for image namespace has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Thriftycat ^{Talk • Contribs} 18:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]