User talk:Staecker/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Speedy deletion of Media Training Worldwide

A tag has been placed on Media Training Worldwide, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD G1.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Oxymoron⁸³ 17:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

5 notifications so far

Staeckerbot has notified me five times so far about the same images - see User talk:SkierRMH page history. Perhaps it's because the images in question are edit protected? SkierRMH (talk) 01:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I see that- it's because those all use an identical image file, that one with the red text. So actually they are duplicates, though obviously they shouldn't be deleted. I'm not sure if it's worth (or plausible) fixing this, since so few people upload that image. I could specifically code an exception for that particular image, but who's to say we won't be using some other placeholder image in the future. I think it makes the most sense to just ignore this one, unless you have a better idea, with my apologies for the notices. (The bot won't notice if you upload them at least 100 images apart, though waiting in between is probably more trouble than it's worth.)

Thanks by the way for all your help clearing out the duplicates- Staecker (talk) 15:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Give me a chance

I got hit by your bot today for uploading a duplicate image. Actually, I was trying to tag the image for Speedy Delete myself when the bot deleted it so no harm done but I was very confused for a moment. There must literally have been only a couple of minutes between uploading the duplicate and the bot acting. Do you think you should give the humans a reasonable time to sort themselves out first? You can't guarantee the correct image gets deleted - right? Spinningspark (talk) 22:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

You must have gotten unlucky. The bot runs every 15 minutes, so your upload probably happened just after one of the runs. Sorry for the hassle- Staecker (talk) 02:06, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Your bot critisized my work.The only reason I uploaded a "duplicate" file is because I messed uploading the file the first time.Looks like Spinningspark and I have been hit by your little bot.MKguy42192 (talk) 08:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)MKguy42192

The purpose of the bot is to fix things when people mess up uploads just like you did, and it seems to have worked just fine. I hope that you don't take offense at this- People "get hit" by the bot when they upload two copies of the same file, that's all. Having somebody clean things up does not constitute criticism of your work, that's just how we do things at wikipedia. Do you think that the bot's notice was overly critical? Feel free to suggest changes if so. Staecker (talk) 13:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh,ok.Now I understand why your bot sent the message.It is kinda hard for someone not to mess up when uploading their first image onto a wikipedia page.Thanks for the explaination.MKguy42192 (talk) 10:04, 4 January 2008 (UTC)MKguy42192

MKguy42192 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Making amends for my trouble waaaayyy before.MKguy42192 (talk) 05:28, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Staecker (talk) 11:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Handicappedfuture.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Handicappedfuture.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) 15:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Yup Sorry, I did it twice, Ive never uploaded a picture before, thanks for catchin it —Preceding unsigned comment added by S kirkness (talk • contribs) 01:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Deleted image

Hi, looks like both my images have been deleted. I took the photo myself and have no idea how to 'tag' it to prevent deletions (I'm very new to Wikipedia). Every time I upload a photo it's removed. I've read all about licenses and tags and I still can't seem to do this right. Can you help me? [1] --S7o7b7 (talk) 21:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)s7o7b7

I got help and fixed it. Thanks! --S7o7b7 (talk) 17:52, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The peoples champ cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:The peoples champ cover.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rappingwonders (talk) 21:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Image:USMadisonvilleTNHeadline.jpg

It's alright to delete this image. The enter key used in the edit box of my browser caused a premature posting of an edit. Must of been some kind of Opera glitch. The new image title seems to make a little more sense to me.

Duplicate images uploaded

Hello Staeckerbot

Image:Burton Wold Wind Farm 22 Jan 2008 (1).JPG. and Image:Blood Hill Windfarm 22 Jan 2008 (1).JPG.
The copy called Image:Blood Hill Windfarm 22 Jan 2008 (1).JPG is fine to mark for speedy deletion as I gave the Image the wrong title by mistake the Image was of Burton Wold Wind Farm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stavros1 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Image Assistance

Thanks for the help with the image removal on Yunjin Kim. I wanted to know if perhaps you had a specific path on where I can read on image uploads? It's not my forte and I need help for future edits. Thanks! Kcuello (talk) 15:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Muslim_religious_society

Yes thankyou very much, can you please delete the previous image I have uploaded which isn't being used any more at the moment, the Image:Muslim_religious_society.png is currently being used on Muslim world which is the new image I have uploaded please keep the image, Thankyou very much! Moshin 17:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Duplicate image - Steves_New_Mug.JPG

Thanks for the heads-up, I didn't realize that I uploaded twice. I'm new to this environment, but I catch on quickly. You may Speedily Delete the bogus image, however, I have requested that my page not be deleted, I have plans for Wiki by including some interesting data, historical facts, etc... Have a Great Day! Steve D. (Steadwell) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steadwell (talk • contribs) 18:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Your bot

Hi, your bot is formatting incorrectly duplicates images. [2] Cheers. Carlosguitar ^{(ready and willing)} 12:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks- I've added this to my list at User:Staeckerbot/Known bugs. Staecker (talk) 13:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Up and running?

Stackerbot hasn't refreshed User:Staeckerbot/Suspicious images since 2/4... just an FYI. Thanks for the continual good work! SkierRMH (talk) 04:17, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Heh- thanks. I forgot to start the old guy back up after I did some system upgrades. I'll get it back running today. And thanks to you for the work too- Staecker (talk) 13:11, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

OK- it's running now. My cron was screwed up. Staecker (talk) 16:01, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Edit question

Why do you consider the table comparing the many DVD editions of this film to be "random information"? I thought that it was quite useful when I added it, because this information is not brought together anywhere else. The table mentioned which DVD editions have which musical scores, whether they are PAL or NTSC and what special features they have. On other film articles, this is not considered "random information". Perhaps a case could be made that certain information in the table wasn't really needed, but in that case only those things should have been removed. Esn (talk) 04:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I was referring to WP:NOT#INFO- which (if any) of these facts are actually notable? The runtime is not (all the same), the ASIN and Catalogue number are not (we aren't selling these), etc. Many of the table entries are vague or poorly written ("It probably contains the same material as the Ninja Tunes R0") and are certainly WP:OR violations. I agree that the choice of soundtrack is really notable, since this really does change the viewing experience, and it is a real artistic choice made by the DVD producers. If the relevant information were written in prose as in the example you gave, then it would be a great part of the article. Staecker (talk) 13:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Crest.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Crest.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 19:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

3D /4d ultrasound scan

Hi Prof Staecker, the specific information i am trying to add is about 3d and 4d baby ultrasound. The technology is similar to 3D (general) ultrasound but the uses are different. I will add it to 3d ultrasound page with a subheading of 4d baby ultrasound. I am going to move the stuff in the next few minutes if your bear with me for 10 minutes, please. Regards Joe —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrJoe K (talk • contribs) 21:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

3D /4d ultrasound scan changes

I've completed the changes, I am not very good with the adding images there seems to be a problem with the placement of the video file, maybe you can fix it.

regards, Joe —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrJoe K (talk • contribs) 22:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

4d baby ultrasound footage

Ok thank you for that. I will re-encode the video again.

regards, Joe —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrJoe K (talk • contribs) 23:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Troubles with my picture

I loaded it up, but I can't see it on my user page. Only the link, but not the picture.

Please help me as soon as possible. Yours sincerly.

Thank you for your message on my talk page. And that you delete the double picture. --AndreaMimi (talk) 21:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Notification Error

The bot seems to be making an error when notifying users, appending '(page does not exist)' to the end of username talk pages. For example: User talk:Jessr6544 (page does not exist) and User talk:InvaderZimm77 (page does not exist). Brianga (talk) 02:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Ouch- that's bad. I probably created hundreds of user talk pages of nonexistent users. It's a parsing issue, since I'm getting the username out of an alt text (or something like that)- This is due to the recently implemented MediaWiki:Red-link-title message, which causes the alt to have different text than the actual page name. I'll try to clean up after myself, meantime the bot is stopped. Speaking of cleaning up, do you know a good way to get a list of all the new pages my bot created in the User talk: namespace in the past week or so? Staecker (talk) 03:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd be glad to help. My method would probably be to pull up a list of your 500 recent edits, then Control+F for 'page does not exist'. What exactly are you going to do to clean it up? Delete the nonexistent pages entirely?

btw, for your info, I posted this on the Admin Noticeboard too. Brianga (talk) 03:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help you out Staecker. I noticed the first page that was created in such a fashion was the following:

11:15, 22 February 2008 (hist) (diff) User talk:Thechikoo (not yet written)‎ (Robot notifying duplicate image uploader)

Need any help on cleanup or do you think you can handle it yourself?¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 03:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, here to help too if you need it :) Tiptoety ^talk 03:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow- thanks for all your offers to help, and thanks to those who deleted all those pages while I slept last night- I got up early today to do it, and now I don't know what to do with myself. Staecker (talk) 12:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe the bot is repaired now- feel free to block if it misbehaves again. Staecker (talk) 13:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for deleting the extra Alexandrea Lushington photograph.

You removed the right one, as the file extension had additional and unnecessary characters, hence my re-upload. Thank you very much! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinemaniac86 (talk • contribs) 05:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello

A bit of a dilemma. I recently uploaded Image:SquishyVic.jpg because the "duplicate", Image:Squishy Vic.jpg, had too many revisions and so I wanted to start off fresh. I therefore tagged the latter image for deletion (along with a couple of others) and am now using the former image. The person in the image is me, and I hold the copyright to the image and therefore I am not infringing on copyrights. Besides, I released it under the CC 3.0 license (which requires Attribution). Well sorry for the mixup, so can you please remove the images from "Suspicious images"? —Victor, Sr. (discussion) (contributions) 06:31, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Running?

It seems like the bot hasn't made any contributions in quite a while. Is something wrong? Brianga (talk) 07:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note- the CamelCase change at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-03-17/Technology report broke my regular expressions. It's back up now. Staecker (talk) 12:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Error in bot tagging

Please ensure your bot doesn't add an extra "Image:" prefix to the image name parameter when calling the {{duplicate}} template, as it did here. I've to say your bot is otherwise doing a much needed job; keep it up! Pegasus «C¦T» 12:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:majulinda.jpg

Hi, I was only trying to replace the image with one I removed the red eye effect, can you help doing that? I just cannot do it! Thanks --Cefaro (talk) 23:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Everything looks fine to me- the image that was kept seems to be the fixed one. Staecker (talk) 00:24, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

It looks fine now, thanks a lot, and sorry for the duplicates--Cefaro (talk) 00:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Duplicate Tags

I noticed that the bot is now using the duplicate template instead of the db-redundantimage template. Is there a reason for the switch? Brianga (talk) 04:36, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The duplicate template is used when neither of the two copies is orphaned. Otherwise, db-redundantimage is used. At least that's how it's always been working (hard to tell since the key edits get deleted from the contribs list). Do you think it's been behaving otherwise? Staecker (talk) 11:58, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I haven't observed a db-redundantimage produced by the bot in quite some time. In fact, I've seen plenty of orphaned images given the duplicate template in the last few days. Brianga (talk) 08:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll check it out- thanks. Staecker (talk) 12:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

OK I think it's fixed now - there is a new MW feature that lists duplicate file locations, conveniently located in the "File links" area, so all duplicated files were being recognized as having links. This new feature can probably make the bot a lot simpler- I don't have to detect the duplicates myself anymore. I'll make some big changes in the coming weeks. Thanks for noticing the error- Staecker (talk) 17:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing it. I suspected that the change you mentioned had something to do with it. I look forward to the changes. Brianga (talk) 20:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Bot Stopped

FYI, I notice there hasn't been an edit in about a day. Brianga (talk) 13:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah- the image page html has changed again, so my regexes broke again. I'll fix it soon. Staecker (talk) 00:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

OK. In the future, can you kindly post a note on your userpage, talkpage, or somewhere else so I know that the bot isn't broken? Brianga (talk) 11:11, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Amidar screenshot.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Amidar screenshot.gif. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Brataccas screen.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Brataccas screen.png. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

IP

This guy seems to be pasting an old version of your talk page everywhere.-Wafulz (talk) 20:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Hm- that's creative... Staecker (talk) 21:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Coming Back?

Any plans to bring the bot back from its offline state? Brianga (talk) 20:29, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I've been real busy lately (check the upload date on Image:3dultrasound 20 weeks.jpg, and do the math). I plan to resurrect it within the next month or so- sorry for the delay. Staecker (talk) 20:55, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that I can think of a better excuse :) Best of luck. Brianga (talk) 00:00, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I hope the offspring is doing well :) Any plans on bringing your bot back? Thanks! Brianga (talk) 03:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

As of now, sadly no. I've got lots of other things going on. Maybe in 6 months or so... my WP presence overall is getting pretty scarce at the moment. Staecker (talk) 11:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Formatting error

In this edit, you apparently intended simply to delete a section. But you left three blank lines between consecutive sections. The first blank line has no effect on what the reader sees but makes it easier for editors to see that a new section starts there. The other two blank lines cause extra white space to appear between sections. I've deleted them now.

So you need to take care to avoid that. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:46, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Lexington High School

I can see how the block schedule may be a bit unnecessary, but I feel that some info on "credits" as they apply to Lexington High School is necessary. I know for a fact that other schools run their credit systems in different ways. I don't think that that info should have been deleted. Tklalmighty (talk) 19:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, but that's OK- actually I feel like I didn't delete enough. But that's just my opinion- you can replace it if you like and see what other people think. I won't start a war about it. Staecker (talk) 20:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Wild at Heart review

Hi - you have twice deleted my link to my Wild at Heart review for being a 'vanity link'. I'm not aware of any specific policy about what you refer to as vanity links, although I suspect this may be due to my own lack of information - I'd appreciate it if you would share that with me. I'd appreciate knowing also whether if the link were put in place by another different Wikipedia user whether you would object.

I like you share the goal of making Wikipedia a better encyclopedia with access to relevant information to the articles in question. I feel that my review is helpful in this regard for exactly the same reasons that the link above it is also helpful. Specifically I think the review I wrote it helpful because it comes at the book from a different perspective to the other review. Perhaps I should have also stressed the difference in terms of how the book is received by an English Evangelical Christian. I did not write the review of the book with the Wikipedia entry in mind (in fact the WP link was added as an after thought), had I thought about receiving any traffic to the review from people outside of my own circle of friends I would have commented more on how the book is received outside of the American church culture for which it is intended.--Robhu 17:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be more notable to refer to the review as a review by an English Evangelical Christian, as all the other reviews are American centric, and there are (I think) significant differences between the two groups? --Robhu 19:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Rob- you're right that there's no policy about "vanity links". I was inventing a term for it on the spot really (we do often talk about "vanity articles", when people create articles about themselves). Sorry if that was confusing. The relevant policy is Wikipedia:External links. See in particular "Links normally to be avoided" which includes blogs (#11), and links inserted for the purpose of promoting the link destination (#4). Based on what you said above, I now know that you aren't trying to link your livejournal just to boost your traffic (sorry if I was suspicious before, I should abide WP:AGF). But (almost) anybody's livejournal page is suspect because of the nature of livejournal. External reviews should be somehow notable in their authorship or publication (I just removed another review which also doesn't meet the standard). WP:EL says that articles on books should have links to "professional reviews", and that's the standard that I'm trying (sorry if a bit inconsistently) to apply. Thanks for contributing, though, I agree a non-American review would be nice. Staecker (talk) 19:43, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Haskell

Re this edit: you may wish to brush up on your knowledge of licensing. That section of text is doubly not a copyvio as 1) I wrote it and I release all my edits here and on haskell.org into the public domain; and 2) the haskell.org wiki license does not require attribution, and is convertible into the GFDL. --Gwern (contribs) 00:44 22 October 2008 (GMT)

Yeah- I left a note at Talk:Haskell (programming language). I didn't check the haskell.org terms, and I didn't realize it was a wiki- now I see it's obviously not a copyvio. Staecker (talk) 02:08, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Reverts

You say you've read my essay but somehow I'm not convinced. Please read WP:TALK and WP:BLP again which allows me to remove the text/links. If you need further help in understanding, may I refer you to Wikipedia:Help desk.--Otterathome (talk) 15:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Let's continue at your talk. Staecker (talk) 18:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Would appreciate you note remove relevant discussion topics

As you recently did to the Star Wars )TV Series) discussion page with one of my posts. My post was relevant to the discussion of what should be included in the article, as it discussed what should be considered a valid source (namely, that George Lucas should, in the case of his statements regarding things that have not been finished or released, not be considered a reliable source as he has been shown consistently to lie about upcoming Star Wars movies/shows in the past).

You deleted it as a forum style post, which is was not, and this was rather rude. I've restored the post. Do not delete it again as it is a valid discussion point about the article. Thanks. Dodger (talk) 02:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I've continued discussion at Talk:Star Wars live-action TV series. Staecker (talk) 12:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

File:Liu Hui stamp.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Liu Hui stamp.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:30, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

File:Arun set.jpg

Could you have a look at this edit? multichill (talk) 23:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what happened with that. I think it looked OK at the time (the edit was over a year ago), but got screwed up as the templates changed. I deleted the garbage in any case. My bot is no longer running so I won't speculate too hard about what went wrong and how to fix it. Staecker (talk) 00:48, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Ten_thousand_years_older_screen.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Ten_thousand_years_older_screen.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media 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 taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images 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 our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 18:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Faulty bot

this is a bug of some sort Plrk (talk) 10:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I think it looked OK at the time (the edit was over a year ago), but got screwed up as the templates changed. I deleted the garbage in any case. My bot is no longer running so I won't speculate too hard about what went wrong and how to fix it. Staecker (talk) 12:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Noösphere

An article that you have been involved in editing, Noösphere, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noösphere. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Dandv (talk) 09:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

File:PaulSimonSongbookCover.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:PaulSimonSongbookCover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 07:13, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I hate to bug you, but...

Any idea why user(s) would be cloning your old user talk pages and claiming it as theirs? See:

• User talk:Absoluteabsolution
• User talk:Namenoonehas
• User talk:Fisherpilot

Something doesn't seem right with this picture. —C.Fred (talk) 03:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Hrm. See User talk:Absoluteabsolution, where he's claiming to be a sockpuppet of User:137.240.136.80. Dunno why he's targeted you—and you seem to be innocent in all this—but I'm blocking the socks. —C.Fred (talk) 03:56, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

This has happened before with User: 66.142.195.205 (see a short note above on this talk page), who I guess is a sock of the above IP. I have no idea who this is, or why they love my talk page so much. For the record, I don't have any other accounts, and I will never intentionally clone my talk page, so you can feel free to block this nonsense wherever you see it. Staecker (talk) 12:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Vandal copy of your talkpage

Hi. I noticed that a vandal has copied entries probably from your talkpage at: User talk:Midvalleythehornfreak. The same vandal has copied the user page of Cplakidas and got reverted by Yannismarou. The vandal replaced the name of Cplakidas by obscene terms in pseudo latin, so it was meant as an attack page. I would normally propose both pages for deletion at MfD but I would like to try to avoid the hassle by requesting speedy deletion as it is clear vandalism. Thanks. Dr.K. logos 03:04, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

See above for some more of this. Feel free to delete any of this nonsense. Staecker (talk) 11:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I see. A larger vandal pattern. They always come up with new ideas. Don't they? Anyway it was deleted by Viridae. BTW I could not delete it because I am not an admin. Sorry for the disturbance. Take care. Dr.K. logos 14:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Teshigahara photo

Well, the other photo is a studio portrait; the one that I uploaded shows Teshigahara in character and on "location". In this case I'm concerned less with the license issue, and more with the fact that there are so few extant Teshigahara photos. If you really want it out of there, perhaps we can find another place for this photo in a related article...any ideas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sba2 (talk • contribs) 20:20, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Very good then...we'll try it over at the "the dunes" article. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sba2 (talk • contribs) 17:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Lost Gilliam.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Lost Gilliam.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Andrew c ^[talk] 00:53, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The Vandalism Thing

Sorry I was trying to delete something else, but there was an editing conflict. I was trying to delete the 'you guys are gay' but someone else already had. I don't know why that was erased. Marx01 (talk) 03:06, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh OK. It's amazing how many allegedly gay people there are on Wikipedia. Staecker (talk) 11:27, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Lsw2gba characters.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Lsw2gba characters.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Basterds

Looks like you really fixed what I thought was too daunting a project for my skills. Good work. Mjpresson (talk) 20:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks- just a bit of the old copy-paste from the history. Staecker (talk) 22:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC)