User talk:Barrycarlyon/Archive Aug 2007

Short-sighted userbox[edit]

This user is short-sighted.

I've now fixed the above template. - Wezzo (talk) (ubx) 16:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leeds Student article sources[edit]

Hi Barry, thanks for the message on my talk page about sources for the Leeds Student article. I am most concerned about the "Other alumni working in the media" section which is a completely unsourced list. While I'm sure most of them are true, there is no way to verify any of that information without sources. There is also a question about whether all these people are notable enough to mention.

Even the "Alumni" section (which should be retitled "Editors", I think) has the same concerns.

Thanks, Gwernol 17:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barry, thanks for getting back to me. I think the best thing to do would be to move the sources tag onto the specific sections and add a note to the talk page: I'd rather give people a chance to start sourcing entries rather than delete them en mass, although if they aren't sourced in a reasonable length of time they will have to be removed. I can make the proposed changes if that makes sense to you?

I was a student at Leeds from '86 to '93 and even had a letter published in the Leeds Student back in the day. Good to hear the paper is now in the Internet age with a web site :-) Gwernol 14:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Priorylsstquad.png[edit]

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 17:10, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Categories[edit]

Firstly, as Category:Student radio in the United Kingdom is already a subcategory of both Category:Campus, college, student and university radio stations and Category:Radio stations in the United Kingdom, it's quite explicitly against Wikipedia's categorization rules to file an article in all three categories simultaneously. A student radio station goes only in Category:Student radio in the United Kingdom; it's accessed from the other categories through that category's link.

Secondly, the pipetext in a category link does not create a list. It just sorts items alphabetically. When you type [[Category:Campus, college, student and university radio stations|United Kingdom]], that doesn't do anything except make the article appear under the letter U. It doesn't create a UK list; it doesn't put the article in a UK category — it just throws the article out of proper alphabetical order. What you see on the category page if you do that is

U
UCTRadio
LSRfm.com

and that doesn't make any sense. That's what I meant by "categorization doesn't work this way". Bearcat 10:35, 5 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Notability of Luu Backstage[edit]

A tag has been placed on Luu Backstage, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you feel that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DarkSaber2k 11:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because it didn't assert any notability, I have speedy deleted the article under CSD A7. If you feel you can get it up to Wikipedia standards, I recommend fleshing it out fully in your sandbox before posting it to the article space. Kafziel ^Talk 14:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:LSRfm.com logo.png[edit]

Hello, Barrycarlyon. An automated process has found and will an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that is in your userspace. The image (Image:LSRfm.com logo.png) was found at the following location: User:Barrycarlyon. This image or media will be removed per criterion 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. This does not necessarily mean that the image is being deleted, or that the image is being removed from other pages. It is only being removed from the page mentioned above. All mainspace instances of this image will not be affected Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 19:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Starting 129.11. (tho it is the entire university of leeds)[edit]

Hello! The article space isn't the correct environment to list IP addresses of vandals or learning establishements, so I have deleted it. Regards, (aeropagitica) 04:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User warnings[edit]

Barry, it's probably best to stick to the template warnings when warning vandals. See WP:UTM for a list of useful warning templates. While your warning to User talk:DaveyPASCOE was meant in jest, these kind of messages have been taken literally in the past, and the user placing such warnings have been blocked. By using the templates, it gives the editor a chance to learn, and helps us block the bad editors faster (since a defined process is being followed). Cheers, Mark Chovain 11:29, 18 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Your VandalProof Application[edit]

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Barrycarlyon. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. ^∆ 22:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Misuse of vandalism tag[edit]

Hi. I noticed you undid my edit here, with an edit summary indicating you considered my edit to be vandalism. I invite you to read WP:VAND and reconsider. Please be more careful in future. Thanks. --John 20:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re. Leeds University Union[edit]

Hello. Semi-protection only prevents users whose accounts are less than 4 days old from editing. This user's account's not that new. If he/she is vandalizing the article, then the adequate procedure is to warn him/her against such actions, and report user to WP:AIV if he/she fails to discuss changes and transgresses a final warning to stop. Best regards, Hús ö nd 13:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]