Please just google it... It has been a 'world class renowned' garden collection since the early 1900s, with Huntington's money & his & Hertrich's collecting Passion amassing quality and quantity. There are '100s - 1000s' of reviews of it for nearly a century. That the whole Bot garden is only covered by the desert section would be like the art collection represented by an adjective bereft 'Pinky' review only. The article appears IPOV (ignorant point of view) with no positive adjective. If you can not come up with a better word please stop removing my efforts. Thank you.---Look2See1 (talk) 06:23, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i was wundering how you put pictures in this text
i was wundering how you put pictures in this text —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nr5278 (talk • contribs) 06:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Use [[File:Picture.jpg]] replacing Picture.jpg with any image uploaded on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons. —Dark 06:30, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Apparently you deleted this article as G3. I just happen to be filipino and I can tell you that this person is notable. Just let some people fix it. BTW I am not the article creator, I just happened to notice it. He is a Filipino actor and 1st runner-up of Pinoy Big Brother: Double Up so he exists and the article is not a hoax. Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 07:46, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe the article creator searched and found a false positive. It could have been improved... Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew 07:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, it's restored. —Dark 07:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am working with a compnay called Edline. We are trying to figure a way where we can control the wiki page better (i.e. not allow all users to edit whenever they want). I believe there is a way to block changes from being made, but of course you must be an administrator to do this. I have reached out to you to see if this is something you can help us with.
Ideally, we would like to set the page so only Edline interanlly can edit content. Please let me know if this is something you can help us with. Or if you have any other options/ideas. That would be a great help for us.
You seem to have misunderstood what Wikipedia is about. We are not a venue for company advertising and promotion. Articles are only protected when there is vandalism or content disputes. —Dark 23:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment
The examples were given on the basis that I have observed in my time here is the assumption and mechanism of trust that works in this community is always skin deep - somehow there is always more to the story than meets the eye - like the constant undercurrent of the irc connection , or the socks etc - that was the connection that I was making :| - it is unfortunate - but it seems the way it is used and abused. One of the reasons when wandering into the items like the transgression - I actually liked the guy from the brief interaction - but then the post found out stage reflects a classic gallows humour level of nanana - I think radical change in registration in this place should be used to reduce possibility of puppets and non registered users ruining the place - the invitation to start an account on the log in page has been there long enough :( SatuSuro 00:19, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, suffice to say that it will be very difficult to prevent sockpuppetry being perpetrated. The problem is that determined people, with an intention to disrupt, will always abuse the system to meet their own end. Currently, there is no technical restriction capable of preventing this; short of getting rid of anon editing and account creation altogether, an idea with no fruit as it will gradually kill the project. Proxies will be able to circumvent any ip block. Another idea will be regular checkusers for editors that hold a degree of trust, which will be in violation of their privacy etc. —Dark 00:31, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yup thats our poison chalice :) oh well, lets hope the community holds it together in the face of whatever :) SatuSuro 00:45, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Altenmann got banned for sockpuppetry. —Dark 06:54, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You can never protect long enough
To stop TRUTH from shining through.
2 weeks good enough for you? And yes I can :) —Dark 05:55, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
it's a date
"The club are..."
I do not think - nor have I ever thought - that consistency for consistency's sake is a good idea. If context dictates that a particular use of "the club" makes it a plural, then the plural should be used, shouldn't it? Anyway, I'm done with this discussion. I suggest that uses of "the club" as a plural in Manchester United F.C. should be replaced with alternate wording. It's obvious that someone will always disagree with whatever is written, whether singular or plural, so my suggestion would appear to be the best course of action. – PeeJay 01:06, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I apologise for having failed to consider that you may not actually have a connection to the article in question and were simply responding to a discussion on Malleus' talk page. So many people have weighed in with their opinions in the last few days that I'm starting to forget who's who! – PeeJay 01:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You misunderstand me. I was not suggesting that consistency should take precedent over proper grammar. In the case of 'the club', replace 'the club' with 'Manchester United Football Club', and you will Malleus' point. "Manchester United Football Club were back in 11th place" or "Manchester United Football Club was back in 11th place". I believe the latter represents proper usage (as an Australian). —Dark 01:59, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Applauding your action here. I was previously anxious about apparent ad-hominem emphasis (see the Talk page) but never really checked it out. The questionable material was introduced here by an IP editor whose contributions history when taken with that of Everton Dasent suggests that the offending edits amounted to an unduly biased attack program. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 16:03, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hopefully it will not be reinstated. One of the worst BLP violations I have seen for a long while, with the scarcely sourced allegations of fraud and misconduct against Crowe. —Dark 01:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no doubt the article was a BLP violation, but surely some kind of page could be done. This man's actions should be presented here on Wikipedia, abet dispassionately so. I would be willing to take a stab at it, but I would like to see the article you deleted.
I will not undelete BLP violations. If you can write an article about him, heeding to our policy on living people then feel free to create one. Please remember to take into account WP:BIO and WP:N/CA. I will delete it again without hesitation if any scarcely sourced content remains, and it is written in a purely negative manner. —Dark 07:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I will review the guidelines before starting.
--Logon Aergon (talk) 18:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
User talk:205.206.142.42 needs a talk page block, as well as some oversight on the /24 range. I'll try and watch for it, but others might want to help. Thanks for the initial block btw. Shadowjams (talk) 08:24, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've by no means given Wikisource up :) Label it a temporary absence if you will, I'm just too busy at the moment. —Dark 09:27, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But why?
Hello Dark, You know I care about your opinion very much. That's why I would like to ask you to clarify it please. I mean that one: [2]. Last night's situation just reminded me two of my own blocks that were very, very unfair with no specific differences explaining the block rationale provided.I wanted to write a proposal about requiring a blocking admin to put at least one specific difference in the block's rational, but then I saw it was already there. So, I thought that blocking admin forgot about that policy, and asked him to review it. What's wrong with it? If you'd rather not to answer my question, that's fine. Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 11:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Rodhullandemu's block rationale was that Sanger does not abide by the aims and objectives of this project. For years now, Sanger has been criticizing this project (whether the criticism was justified, I have no comment). He has, in Rodhullandemu's point of view, been disruptive to this project: "my personal view is that any edit editor who is unpreprared to subscribe to that principle does not belong here". I think Rod is objecting towards Sanger's stance towards this project as a whole, especially the recent issues with pedophilia and criticism of Wikipedia. —Dark 11:28, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But Dark, the reason the block is inappropriate is that editors shouldn't be held to different standards just because they hold personal views at odds with Wikipedia policy; it should be their actual behavior that matters. I disagree with a number of Wikipedia policies, and try to edit constructively in spite of this. If an editor wanted to block me they'd be obliged to point out the cases in which I actually violated policy; my beliefs should have nothing to do with it.
In this particular case, Sanger's comments on his own talk page are certainly childish, but the two brief notes he added to the article pages were neither disruptive nor completely irrelevant. Or, at the very least, neither violation could possibly be egregious enough to justify an indefinite block without discussion. The whole situation really does come off as an admin searching for a pretext to get rid of an editor who he like. It completely undermines the trust the community offers to admins. Rvcx (talk) 12:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did not say I agree with Rod's views regarding this. I have no opinion regarding Sanger's comments, except that many in the community were offended by it. Whether this offence is great enough that Sanger should be blocked? Well, I simply do not care to comment. I was simply restating Rod's rationale for his block. —Dark 12:45, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but I think it's entirely appropriate for community members to ask Rod to explain his actions, and inappropriate for you to tell them they shouldn't. Engaging with Rod directly seems like the right first step. Rvcx (talk) 12:55, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problems with people engaging Rod with discussion. Except that Mbz1 was quoting policy to him, when it's quite obvious that Rod (as an administrator) is familiar with our blocking policy. While it is unintentional, it came across to me under the wrong tone. I have no qualms with Mbz1's intentions, just that it seemed a bit heavy-handed to treat him like a naughty child. —Dark 13:02, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But by all means, if it came across in the wrong fashion, I apologise. —Dark 13:06, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and the real reason I turned up here: Dark, don't start bickering with anonymous editors on someone else's talk page. Rvcx (talk) 12:36, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. That will be my last comment to him. —Dark 12:45, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dark, please do forgive me for posting that message to your talk page. If I knew what would have followed, I would have never have. The thing is that with all my ignorance I had no idea who Larry Sanger was, and what he was doing. I had no idea about FBI and so on. Even now I read something, but not a lot. What I saw was two innocent IMO edits at the articles talk page, and then indefinite block of the editor. The last edit before that was made on April 20. I even have not looked at it. That's why I asked the blocking admin to review the policy because I believe that for Wikipedia's own good, if an editor is blocked, the block's rationale should be stated clearly. Once again I am sorry I asked you to clarify your opinion. Please do feel free to delete my message. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:25, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Mbz1, you really do not need to apologise so much :) It's no problem. —Dark 13:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I would not have apologized at all, if it was not for you, but to you I do own much more than that apology. It was the second time our Wikipedia ways have crossed out, and the second time I created some troubles for you. Anyway... I would try to be more mindful in the feature :) Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:47, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It contained content which can be considered controversial - especially since it was unsourced. Feel free to recreate if you can provide reliable sources. —Dark 09:11, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not trying to be mean or anything, but on the fuck page i was gonna start a section alternate spellings.
--SheaSheaShea (talk) 00:38, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To be a joinin' the fun and frolicks, yer can be addin' {{User:Chzz/pirate}} to the top o' yer talkpage / userpage for today, fer a fine fancy decoration. Emptied after midnight it'll be, so don't be dallyin' now!
Disclaimer: It's very rare for me to send messages like this; it might seem frivolous or hypocritical, as I often complain about myspacing of the project. However, as a pastafarian, this is my equivalent of a Christmas greeting. I seriously believe we need to have fun sometimes. If you object, I apologize; let me know, and I won't bother you again.
Could you help with the content. I have a pile of PDFs that can be mailed, but it is a lot to read YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 08:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not right now. I am struggling with my workload, as it is :/ —Dark 09:29, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
New South Wales has been nominated for a featured portal review. During this review, editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the portal from featured status. Please leave your comments and help us to return the portal to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, portals may lose its status as featured portals. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Elekhh (talk) 02:16, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on File:HUF 1000 2002 obverse.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
Image is Duplicated on Commons, Commons image is of higher quality and is specfically licensed as opposed to FUR
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:24, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 1000 2006 obverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 200 2001 reverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 5000 2005 obverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 1000 2006 reverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 500 2001 reverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 5000 2005 reverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 200 2001 obverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 20000 2004 reverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 10000 1998 obverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 10000 1998 reverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 2000 2002 obverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 1000 2002 reverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 500 2001 obverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 2000 2002 reverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 1000 2000 Millennium reverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 1000 2000 Millennium obverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:31, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:HUF 20000 2004 obverse.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thanks for reverting that page to a previous version - at that time, it seemed to me like a joke.
Still, it seems like one page created for fun. See the references - Facebook fan page, orkut page, and a youtube video.
And the discussion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sam_Anderson_%28Tamil_actor%29
"u guys really shoud see the movie...it was soo bad and there was really reports of two persons attempting to commit suicide in the local newspaper after seeing the movie...the author may have used some exorbitant comparisons but i think sam nderson deserves this"
It still seems a joke to me, on an actor, who is not note-worthy.
I have never heard about him to comment on him anyway. So pls have a look, if you have more time and knowledge.
Yeah I put the article up for PROD. It's probably one of those obscure internet memes that hardly anyone has heard of... —Dark 11:11, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But the editor has been here since 2005, and has worked productively so far (based on a cursory glance) , so I doubt it's vandalism. —Dark 11:13, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Concerned
The statement on the talk page of Stacey Bendet by Bazj very much concerns me. As s/he appears to be something of a new page patroller, the fact that s/he seems to believe that works made by a person do not contribute to their notability is highly concerning. These mistaken standards should especially not be being applied to pages made by new users, as I cannot think of a better way to discourage new users from contributing, other than outright berating them. However, this is also not something I feel should be taken to ANI, so i'm not quite sure where to go from here, but I feel that Basj really needs to understand that they are incorrect in their thinking. SilverserenC 20:49, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I already pointed out it to him earlier to be more careful with A7 taggings. I don't believe any further action is necessary, especially not ANI since it often stirs up more controversy than it can resolve. —Dark 23:58, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am too beat up to care now. I have reported one editor for being terribly mean and I simply was trying to finish what the request was on the original Space Coast Office of Tourism article. The link was self generated, I did not create it. You have all been using this site for a long time. I have not. Thank you and good day. please delete all my pages if you can do that for me. Space Coast Office of Tourism and all the rest. one editor has been particularly mean to me and I am finished. Happy new year
Donnabalancia (talk) 09:52, 31 December 2011 (UTC) DB[reply]
Okay it's been deleted. —Dark 09:59, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
