User talk:Nhprman

Nhprman's Talk Page

If you leave a message for me here, I'll respond here, unless asked to respond on your Talk page, which I will cheerfully do!

Orwellian

"Quite apart from the suppression of definitely heretical words, reduction of vocabulary was regarded as an end in itself, and no word that could be dispensed with was allowed to survive. Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought, and this purpose was indirectly assisted by cutting the choice of words down to a minimum." - George Orwell's description of Newspeak in 1984 and the goal of Wikipedia's Iconoclastic, Reductionist and Deletionist Jihadists. I will leave them to it.

This user is a member of WikiProject New Hampshire, which seeks to expand information about the state. Please feel free to join us.

Comment invited

As an occasional past editor at Template:United States presidential election, 2008,
your comment is invited at Template talk:United States presidential election, 2008#Revisited: Proposal on minimum standards for listing on template
-- Yellowdesk (talk) 18:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the invitation. I've been watching this page and have contributed to the discussion. - Nhprman 19:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Thslogo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Thslogo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, the previous fair use template, noting that this was a low-resolution image used for purely illustrative purposes, was completely sufficient under all existing law regarding fair use. That is, until the Deletionists created this fearsome monster called "non-free" and decided to denude Wikipedia of all images. Again, knock yourselves out, you sad, pathetic little dictators. LOL - Nhprman 04:31, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Holyfamilyacadlogo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Holyfamilyacadlogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have added fair use rationale required under WP:RAT. User:BetacommandBot's edits throughout WP has provoked universal condemnation and the bot has been blocked several times by admins who are shocked by its hundreds of thousands of random, often incorrect edits. - Nhprman 04:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:JSRHSseal.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:JSRHSseal.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:18, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have added fair use rationale required under WP:RAT. User:BetacommandBot's edits throughout WP has provoked universal condemnation and the bot has been blocked several times by admins who are shocked by its hundreds of thousands of random, often incorrect edits. - Nhprman 04:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template discussion

As an occasional editor to the discussion at Template:United States presidential election, 2008 your input would be appreciated at Template talk:United States presidential election, 2008#Proposal: A return to the old standards. Thank you.--S TX 04:37, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I feel less lonely

Is there a fellowship of contributors tired of zealous delitionists ? At least, since I read your comments about BetacommandBot, I feel less lonely. Baronnet (talk) 23:47, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS : may I use (and maybe adapt) the Orwellian box ? Baronnet (talk) 23:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is wonderful to hear from another, too! Thank you for your kind words. ;-) Yes, by all means adapt the box. I adapted it from elsewhere, myself. - Nhprman 02:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Taylor Bowles

Under the now-current standards at Template:United States presidential election, 2008, with approximate agreement on zero dollar reported FEC activity threshold, it appears this person qualifies for listing on the template (though I won't be adding him). -- Yellowdesk (talk) 20:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orwell box

You need not call delitionists other names. That's descriptive enough. Jihadist is inflamatory. -- Yellowdesk (talk) 21:16, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I only used it because "Crusader" is somehow not quite politically correct, though works just as well. Seriously, when someone makes it a point to delete EVERY IMAGE from Wikipedia, and sets up a Bot to do the job, "philosophically inclined towards deleting stuff" (i.e. "Deletionist") doesn't seem to state the case strong enough. But point taken. Rhetorical barbs only go so far, esp. here, where those who oppose expanding knowledge are so numerous, and 'efficient' at stifling the debate. What's the point in fighting it so hard? seems to be my mood, for the most part. - Nhprman 04:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can appreciate the frustration, and admit I have not met up with the sort you apparently have. Cheers, Yellowdesk (talk) 04:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lucky you. Then again, I'm sure you must have heard of Betacommandbot. He/it is a great example of that sort. - Nhprman 14:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider taking the AGF Challenge

I would like to invite you to consider taking part in the AGF Challenge which has been proposed for use in the RfA process [1] by User: Kim Bruning. You can answer in multiple choice format, or using essay answers, or anonymously. You can of course skip any parts of the Challenge you find objectionable or inadvisable.--Filll (talk) 15:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Frankguinta.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Frankguinta.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media 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. Sherool (talk) 21:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Josh Logan

I have nominated Josh Logan (vocalist), an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Logan (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Logan

I still don't see how he meets WP:MUSIC. Just placing in a reality tv series isn't a criterion of WP:MUSIC, and I don't really see any reliable sources, outside trivial coverage related to the tv series. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:13, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know this is going to be an unsatisfactory answer, but he gets plenty of LOCAL coverage, though I will freely admit that he's not a superstar, and I bet he would, too. Then again, does WP require superstar status for "notability"? Someone "of note" means that they are known, to an extent. But does it mean universal know-ability? I think there's a grey area here that requires perhaps a bit of wisdom and the occasional exception to rigidity. As I said, perhaps too vociferously, there's an intepretation of the Notability guidelines here that are a bit too stringent, rigid and legalistic. Mr. Logan is not famous, important or necessarily 'popular.' But then again the WP:N guidelines state that "Notability is distinct from fame, importance, or popularity," - Nhprman 04:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:30x11octnovdec06.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 19:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Nhprman. 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]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Nhprman. 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

Hello, Nhprman. 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]

2019 US Banknote Contest

US Banknote Contest

November-December 2019

There are an estimated 30,000 different varieties of United States banknotes, yet only a fraction of these are represented on Wikimedia Commons in the form of 2D scans. Additionally, Colonial America, the Confederate States, the Republic of Texas, multiple states and territories, communities, and private companies have issued banknotes that are in the public domain today but are absent from Commons.

In the months of November and December, WikiProject Numismatics will be running a cross-wiki upload-a-thon, the 2019 US Banknote Contest. The goal of the contest is to increase the number of US banknote images available to content creators on all Wikimedia projects. Participants will claim points for uploading and importing 2D scans of US banknotes, and at the end of the contest all will receive awards. Whether you want to claim the Gold Wiki or you just want to have fun, all are invited to participate.

If you do not want to receive invitations to future US Banknote Contests, follow the instructions here

Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Screen International Security Services

The article Screen International Security Services has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence nor claim of notability, under WP:NCORP, WP:GNG or any other notability guideline. Sources are all deprecated or dead. WP:BEFORE shows zero RS coverage, certainly not any of WP:CORPDEPTH.

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. David Gerard (talk) 14:52, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DS Alerts

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Jorm (talk) 17:00, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]