User talk:Joe King/Archive 3

Image copyright problem with File:A for Andromeda (2006).png

Thanks for uploading File:A for Andromeda (2006).png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 06:03, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are listed as a GA reviewer. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.

We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:26, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

ga reassessment of Jean-Claude Mézières

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:Jean-Claude Mézières/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:45, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Spurious Dublin regions

You seem to be somewhat behind the times. Brace yourself - County Dublin is no more. It is an ex County. Bereft of life, it has gone the way of other former administrative entities. See the Local Government Act 2001 if you don't believe me. See County Dublin itself if you want further proof. A consensus has been reached to hive off those entities that can be hived off from the County Dublin category to their equivalents in the 4 entities that now make up County Dublin (of blessed memory). Some, of course, it is impossible to hive off. No attempt will be made to break those that are inextricably linked to the former county. Fortunately, no geographic category is in that situation: all are eminantly suitable candidates for hiving off. Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I have moved this discussion to the talk page on wikiproject Ireland since I think it needs a public airing. -Joe King (talk) 13:00, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Valerian New Future Trilogy.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Valerian New Future Trilogy.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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 04:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Valerian New Future Trilogy.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Valerian New Future Trilogy.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.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:36, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Montpelier Hill

The article Montpelier Hill you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Montpelier Hill/GA1 for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Pyrotec (talk) 20:23, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

No problems, I enjoyed reviewing it. I looked at your Users contributions and I assumed that you were temporarily inactive, so I left this note here. Pyrotec (talk) 20:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I meant to reply before to your note on my talk page in March informing me that you got the deserved GA. Sorry I missed the witty acceptance speech. Congratulations. — O'Dea (talk) 18:14, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

How interesting.

It is interesting how one's images uploaded to Wikipedia are appropriated. It is also interesting how at the What Is Ookaboo? page, they say, "All pictures on Ookaboo are in the public domain or are under Creative Commons -- that means that you can use our pictures for your web site, classwork, or other creative projects!" (My italics.) I must say, it is very generous of them to allow anyone to use their pictures like that. — O'Dea (talk) 13:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Had a look. In fairness they are following the CC Share-Alike and credit is given along with the correct instructions for reuse. Bit rich that they don't mention the original source is Wikimedia Commons though. - Joe King (talk) 16:09, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Liverpool F.C. wiki

Hello, I am the lead sysop on the Liverpool F.C. wiki. It is a wiki dedicated solely to Liverpool F.C.. We aim to make the ultimate database for the club we all love. Since adopting the incredibly inactive wiki about a month ago we have greatly increased the article count and modernized it from it's previous state. The problem is there are not many active members on the site and we need more for the site to properly grow. It is well organized and on it's way to be a great site we just need more editors to expand. It is based on Wikia's network of wikis. Like Wikipedia it is free to use and the editing process is exactly the same. If you know how to edit Wikipedia you will know how to edit the Liverpool F.C. wiki. Now for the question you may be asking yourself. Why edit there? Wikipedia has articles on Liverpool. This is true. At the Liverpool wiki it is all about Liverpool. We allow editors to edit anything about Liverpool no matter how trivial. We allow edits on reserve and academy players, and even things as trivial as the fitness coaches for the year 2011. We also do not lock pages to registered users. That means if you have something to say about Steven Gerrard you can click edit and not view source and actually write something. I would love for you to come by and check the wiki out. Feel free to edit any page. Every time you click edit your ARE helping this wiki grow. Thanks for taking the time to read this! http://liverpoolfc.wikia.com/wiki/Liverpool_FC_Wiki --Coffeeclub213 (talk) 17:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Wicklow Way

Wonderful work mate, if only all other Irish geography articles were of similar standard. I have nominated this article for GA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:05, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Wicklow Way

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 18 July 2011 (UTC)