User talk:Photolarry

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. You are, however, encouraged to add appropriate content to the encyclopedia. If you feel the material in question should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. A ecis ^{Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984.} 22:09, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the message you left on my talk page: "I have the name PHOTO LARRY and it is copyrighted by me. Many people search the web for me. I just was placing the definition of myself so people can locate me." That is not what wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not the Yellow Pages. Subjects of wikipedia articles need to pass the notability guidelines (see for instance WP:BIO, WP:CORP and WP:WEB). It's also not advised to write articles about yourself or your company. A ecis ^{Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984.} 18:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Autobiography: if you are truly notable, someone will come along to write an article about you sooner or later. If you come across an autobiography, or any other article, that you believe doesn't belong on wikipedia, feel free to nominate it for deletion. However, that doesn't absolve this particular article of its responsibilities. Photo Larry didn't assert the notability of the subject and it had no content and no context (speedy deletion criteria A1 and A3). Wikipedia doesn't exist so that people are able to find you. Wikipedia exists to neutrally and verifiably inform users of notable and encyclopedic subjects. And yes, we allow porn actors on here, provided they are notable. That is because wikipedia is not censored. If you still strongly disagree with the deletion of your article, you may ask for a deletion review. A ecis ^{Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984.} 23:32, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Photo Larry[edit]

A tag has been placed on Photo Larry, 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 (see the guidelines for notability here). If you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please write {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

Please read the criteria for speedy deletion (specifically, articles #7) and our general biography criteria. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Diez2 18:17, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently re-created the article Photo Larry, which was deleted in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policies. Please do not re-create the article. If you disagree with the article's deletion, you may ask for a deletion review. A ecis ^{Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984.} 18:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Diane1.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Diane1.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:07, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Photo Larry.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Rushbugled13 (talk) 04:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:William McNamara.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:William McNamara.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

It was taken from IMDB where the information is corroborated totally. I highly doubt he objects!

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm Uncle Milty. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Bobby Trendy, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. | Uncle Milty | talk | 21:38, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I updated this information again and it has been verified by a personal friend that has viewed his drivers license as well as gotten the information from the high school he attended. I can provide that informant info if you wish.

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Bobby Trendy. Thank you. A proper reference links as directly as possible to confirmation of the information you are adding to the article. | Uncle Milty | talk | 21:47, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Bobby Trendy shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. | Uncle Milty | talk | 21:53, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:59, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 2014[edit]

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to November 4, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 15:16, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I did click that check box. Both edits are minor if they are not checked as such. I occasionally add missing people from the daily entry (November 4 for example)

Disambiguation link notification for September 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited September 6, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clarence Saunders. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sorry. I try my best to be accurate. Photolarry (talk) 18:15, 6 September 2015 (UTC)photolarry –== Replaceable fair use File:Tammie Brown Dragcon 2015.jpg ==[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Tammie Brown Dragcon 2015.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:12, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps you didn't see or I didn't tag correctly but I own this item and authorized usage on Wikipedia. I know Tammie personally and am sure she'd prefer a good photo...that I own to be used. please advise how to mark that is my copyright is authorized and I took this picture and have release as shown by her looking at me Photolarry (talk) 16:44, 14 September 2015 (UTC) photolarry[reply]

Hi, thanks for your answer. Of course we'd very much appreciate you offering your photograph here; the thing is just that you marked it in a way that implies you are offering it to Wikipedia exclusively and wish to have it treated as non-free otherwise. Unfortunately, according to our rules about free and non-free content, we can't accept an image under these terms; we generally insist that anything we use here should also be freely reusable by others. If you are okay with granting your picture under such a wider license, then all will be fine; just put the license code {{cc-by-sa}} (or some other such tag from the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags) on the image page and I'll do the rest of the paperwork. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:50, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Did I do that correctly? I put {{cc-by-sa}} in the place I think you requested Photolarry (talk) 17:11, 14 September 2015 (UTC) photolarry[reply]

Yes, thanks, it's fine now. I just adapted the rest of the templating code accordingly. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:40, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! And Tammie thanks you too :) Photolarry (talk) 19:28, 14 September 2015 (UTC)photolarry[reply]

Miss Kiwi[edit]

Hello. I saw the edit summary you left with your creation of the article on Miss Kiwi: "I am creating this page because there is no documentation anywhere about Miss Kiwi on the internet and most of the famous drag queens from RuPaul drag race worked with her locally before her death." Actually, Wikipedia isn't a place for writing up topics that haven't already been covered elsewhere. In fact, the notability of Wikipedia articles topics must be demonstrable, typically through significant coverage in multiple reliable sources independent of the topic. Those sources don't have to be on the Internet, but they need to exist. Article content that isn't supported in appropriate sources is considered original research, which isn't permitted. Are you sure you can't find qualifying material on which to base the article? —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:22, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I spoke to several people that knew her. As I noted in references. And I am trying to complete as much information as possible. Do you need something in writing? Reason I need to know this is because I also plan on writing another article about Hunter Smith, a drag performer that worked with Chad Michaels too.

I believe she was quite notable just that nobody ever took the time to write anything about her and I wanted to do that for both Chad Michaels , as well as Sutan Amrull, to which both were highly influenced. Let me know what I can do to preserve this article as I believe it should be worthy. Thank you

Photolarry (talk)photolarry

Yes, that's the concern. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia isn't a medium for first publication of information being compiled for the first time. For example, while scientific articles can be written about research that has been published elsewhere, with the information in those article being sourced to those other publications, a scientist can't create a Wikipedia article and directly record the results of his own research there.

The degree to which people have taken the time to write about someone, in reliable sources, is largely the measure by which that determination of notability is made, under the WP:general notability guidelines. There are some alternative criteria, which you can find in WP:BIO and WP:ENTERTAINER, but the general guidelines are the ones that need to be met in most cases. —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:46, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field: That is the rule is it not? I am sure she was written about....I did not mean to imply nobody ever mentioned her in publications. I can try to get confirmation of this with some editorial contacts. Again I believe she was noteworthy. So if there is any other way of proving it, please tell me.

Photolarry (talk)photolarry

Speedy deletion nomination of Miss Kiwi[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Miss Kiwi requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 removed 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. —Largo Plazo (talk) 03:52, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 04:44, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Miss Kiwi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint Louis. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Miss Kiwi[edit]

I have moved your article to Draft:Miss Kiwi to allow you time to find reliable sources. Unless someone else has written about Miss Kiwi before the article will never survive. Wikipedia only has articles about subjects that others have written about. We then take what others have written about and summarize the information in our article. You should read WP:ANYBIO, it is a guideline that describes how someone can have an article in Wikipedia. I would also suggest you read WP:FIRST it describes how to write your first article. Another page you should read is WP:OR. This one talks about using original research in articles and why we don't allow it. Based on what you wrote on the article's talk page, the article was based on your original research. If you have any questions please ask. -- GB fan 15:33, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of clarification, I want to mention, regarding User:GB fan's point about reading WP:ANYBIO: Photolarry has seen that, having drawn my attention to the part that reads "The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field." In his view, Miss Kiwi meets that description. However, in responding, I didn't get as far as checking out the footnote that's attached to that provision and that's relevant here. It reads:

Generally, a person who is "part of the enduring historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books on that field, by historians. A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists. An actor who has been featured in magazines has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple magazine feature articles, by magazine article writers. An actor or TV personality who has "an independent biography" has been written about, in depth, in a book, by an independent biographer.

—Largo Plazo (talk) 16:04, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody has written about her however I did learn she appeared in Miss Congeniality 2 in the "one night stand" scene and is the center girl. And was also in CSI 2005 episode called Nesting Dolls. There were no credits on IMDB so unsure where to get the needed references you are requesting. I guess because Wikipedia is claiming the individual is not noteworthy (enough) then you will end up deleting this. So I will not put forth effort to preserve this. Sadly the staff here needs to be a bit more flexible about page creation. Again, I am not asking for one to be created about some nobody that is not worthy of it. She was a staple in the scene for decades. I just am not connected enough to get the credentials you seem to require. So just delete this page and I will not try to make one for Hunter. I will get the same rhetoric about that one too. The trouble is that much of this is UNDOCUMENTED and needs to be placed out there for historical reasons. That is why it is my belief this should go into wikipedia. Apparently both of the moderators do not concur.

Photolarry (talk) 22:59, 14 December 2015 (UTC)photolarry[reply]

I don't care what your do. I've given up fighting with you people over legitimate people that belong here. I don't have additional sources and you don't seem to want to find them instead of deleting. I'm not a Wikipedia expert. I just put entries of noteworthy people. Do whatever. I give up. Good bye. You did the same stunt work another drag performer that's just as noteworthy as kiwi and so...I give up

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Photolarry. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Lady Red performing downtown LA.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Lady Red performing downtown LA.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Train2104 (t • c) 13:36, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lady Red Couture[edit]

The article Lady Red Couture has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable performer. Sources only point to the existence of the performer and her program. The large "filmography" is in fact a list of other drag performers, rather than films in which she has performed --- That is because she is interviewing the performers. That does not invalidate the notariaety of this person. What is with you stupid editors? I do not get why you cannot let this be. She is famous enough and more noteworthy than any of these artists she has interviewed. If McGovern can have a page, she should too. #GetALIFE and #LeaveThisAlone

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 23:44, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You people are just evil. Stop picking on MY entry. Delete it because WIKIPEDIA is biased garbage that any educator will not accept as factual or truthful.

Nomination of Lady Red Couture for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lady Red Couture is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Red Couture until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 00:13, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on Wikipedia[edit]

I understand it can be annoying - or worse - to have articles that you've clearly spent time writing being tagged as "non-notable" and other terms by people you don't know. That said, Wikipedia does have a large number of policies and guidelines (just like other large websites do), regarding what does and doesn't qualify as a suitable subject for an article. The most important one of these is notability, which indicates that the subject of the article needs to have in-depth coverage from reliable sources. To take a rather extreme example, a national leader is going to have this coverage easily because everything he/she does gets reported on in the media - whereas someone like me won't, because I'm just a person at a computer here.
In the case of Lady Red Couture, the sources you'd provided for that article confirm that the show she hosts exists and (therefore) that she also exists. This is a good start, but it doesn't provide the depth of coverage required by that policy I linked you to. I'm more than willing to believe that there might be that sort of coverage out there, though, which is why I tagged the article for "Proposed Deletion" - it notifies you that there's a concern and gives you time to contest that proposal (which you did) and provide more evidence of her notability. We've now moved into another phase, which is where other editors are allowed to comment as well, and the consensus will then determine whether the article stays or not.
I would caution you against a couple of things, though. The first is the argument that "If So-and-So has an article, why can't Such-and-Such have one?" The only Johnny McGovern I can find with an article is an Irish sportsman, but remember that each and every article here stands or falls on its own merits. If there's another article about a person you feel is "just as notable" as someone you want to write about, then it may be worthwhile looking at the level of sources that other article has. If there's a lot, then some of them may even be relevant for the article you want to write (particularly if the two subjects work together). If it seems to have problems, it may be the kind of article which should be deleted as well.
The second thing against which I would caution you is taking any part of this personally. It's not a judgement on you as a person, or even really on the subject of the article you wrote as a person. The "staff" (we're all volunteers, by the way, us admins, so I don't think "staff" is quite the right term) are just trying to make the website work the way it's meant to. Saying things like "Get a life" and so on really doesn't help. Another policy Wikipedia has is one against making personal attacks, so it's probably a bad move to continue in this vein.
Feel free to comment either here or on my Talk page if you have any further questions. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 00:29, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a professional wiki editor dude! I entered it because I know the person and think it should exist. McGovern is the host of the same show and I can link you if you like. I think he spells it Johny .... I am not sure. Not a golfer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonny_McGovern I do not know why this is such a big hairy deal. The person is obviously famous "enough". I do not get why I have to argue this at all. I did this because I know Lady Red and think she should have an entry. And having IMDB and other references should be sufficient.

I've responded on my Talk page, which I think is probably the best place to continue this discussion by now. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 01:30, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

June 2017[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Lady Red Couture. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. | Uncle Milty | talk | 00:56, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Miss_Kiwi[edit]

Are you going to fix up Draft:Miss_Kiwi? Otherwise it should probably be cleaned up. It was moved to draft-space after a delete to give an opportunity to clean it up, but there's been no activity since 2015, so I've nominated it for deletion. - GretLomborg (talk) 05:37, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Photolarry, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be blatant advertising which only promotes or publicises a company, product, group or service. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

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 removed 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. GretLomborg (talk) 06:34, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse invitation[edit]

Hello! Photolarry, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! LadyofShalott 15:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where is this happening? It seems they wish to delete me so I am not sure why I would go to this. My contributions are never taken seriously and staff always deletes the articles that I create. Wny should I volunteer my time?

You are deleting my talk page?? Excuse me but you do not get to delete my talk page for any reason. I have done nothing and have been contributing for years. Just because the staff thinks it has powers to punish me for commenting freely is not a reason to remove my talk page. Your staff just amazes me at how rigid and inflexible they are when it comes to my contributions. And I see that as an attack on the LGBT community overall. Do not delete my talk page. It was bad enough that I had to fight with your staff about other entries including my own. I am not advertising in any way. I do not have a clue why you would think I am doing that. I take pictures of famous people which I use at times. But even that seems to be unacceptable to the staff of Wikipedia. I give up. Obviously Wiki is no longer a place for the community to share information freely without being censored.

Dear Photolarry, you seem to have some misunderstandings about how Wikipedia works. The Teahouse is a friendly place to ask lots of questions and change that. I don't think anyone has said anything about deleting your talk page (this very page); that is quite uncommon, and there is no reason for it to happen here. LadyofShalott 02:43, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No no look above. This invitation is not what I am referencing. See the topic above.

Speedy deletion nomination of Photo Larry[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that Photo Larry, a page that you created, has been tagged for deletion. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It appears to be a test page. (See section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do, and take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
It is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. (See section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 removed 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. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:44, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure I understand. Are you deleting my PAGE or my Talk?? I obviously do not care about the Wiki Page. I am not famous and do not need a page for myself.

Your page. That was deletion of the page about you. Nobody has proposed deletion of your talk page. LadyofShalott 03:51, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you Photolarry (talk)photolarry

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Photolarry. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Photolarry. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022[edit]

Hello, I'm GA-RT-22. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Hervé Villechaize, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. GA-RT-22 (talk) 13:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022[edit]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Hervé Villechaize, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. GA-RT-22 (talk) 12:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did recite a source! There is NO article ever published anywhere that shows the audio tape was EVER released by LAPD and I am certain the LAPD would never release it to the public under any circumstances. I live in LA (for the last 21 years) and am very familiar with LAPD and how they operate. So what harm is there in adding that the audio has NOT been released??? I do not understand why you are being so critical of a long time contributor to Wikipedia. Frankly I do not care if you remove my edits. I think you need to find something else to occupy your time instead of harassing me. THANK YOU! Photolarry (talk) 06:39, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proper way to insert images in infoboxes[edit]

Hello @Photolarry. I am @Archer1234. I noticed your recent edit to Detox Icunt where you added an image to the infobox. I want to let you know that the way you added the image was not done according to Wikipedia's Manual of Style (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE).

When adding an image to an infobox, thumbnails should NOT be used. Simply supplying the file name will work. For example, to use File:Image PlaceHolder.png, you can simply use |image=Image PlaceHolder.png. Captions should be specified with the |caption= parameter. Every infobox is different and the documentation for the infobox in question should be consulted for the proper parameters to match the image and caption.

To fix

Do not use the full image syntax:

|image=[[File:SomeImage.jpg|thumb|Some image caption]]

Instead, just supply the name of the image. So, in this case you can simply do:

|image=SomeImage.jpg

and optionally:

|caption=Some image caption.

Hopefully you will find this information useful for your future editing. If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask. Happy Editing. — Archer1234 (t·c) 09:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Photo Larry[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Photo Larry requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Wikishovel (talk) 10:44, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]