User talk:Sliggy

Please add any comments (etc.) at the end of this page. Thanks, Sliggy

RE: Danny Simpson

Question- are we not allowed to describe the player's style of play? I had assumed we were in order to better know the player? I guess it makes sense not to though.. thanks. StrikerCW (talk · contribs)

Hi Sliggy, You had a question about Vessel of Sadness. The quote comes from the blurb on the 2004 edition (Abacus paperback). For other quotes go to williamwoodruff.com. Best wishes Woodruff 22:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC) __________________________________________________________________________________________________[reply]

shortage economy <- this one is good, needs fleshing out

Waterloo via Weybridge railway service

Are you actually intending to do this for all railways and all stations? (or ask a WikiProject to...)
Isn't there some way of automating it?

Ojw 23:25, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I've added Waterloo via Weybridge railway service to the existing VfD for the sake of consistency and expediency. No bad-faith or anything: but there is no point in only testing one of the articles. If you feel they should be separate please do feel free to split them up. -Splash 02:05, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

USS Trever (DD-339)

I don't object to removing some of the hyperbole that is part of many DANFS histories, but you seem to have gone overboard in reducing the amount of pertinent information. Request that you reconsider some of the changes that you've made (i.e., removing the information about where she was laid down and who her first commanding officer was wasn't necessary clips). Jinian 19:36, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I understand some of your reasoning here, but can't help feeling that you're removing some of the more interesting stories from the history. "Just the facts" might be good sometimes, but education (which may be what an enclyclopedia is about) is more than just facts. Your cuts seem fairly wholesale and will be difficult to reconsistute without a full revision. (By the by, the name of the CO was simply an example, but is normally included because of what he might have gone on to do, rather than what the ship did.) Jinian 12:08, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely done. Thanks for being open to another POV and doing such a good done removing the DANFS bias. Jinian 16:26, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The rest of the class - Thanks for doing the NPOV work on the rest of the class. DANFS, while accurate, was definitely a US publication and often showed that bias. I'll try to follow your example as I continue to move ships' histories over. While I often removed some of the text, you caught others that I missed. Thanks. Jinian 13:41, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fake color articles

Because of the complexity of the vote at the above AfD, I have attempted to break down the individual votes on the AfD talk page. If I have misunderstood your vote with respect to any of these, please correct it. Cheers! -- BD2412 ^talk 12:54, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sliggy,

Noticed that you are the editor of my posted article on Caroline Carver. Im afraid Id overlooked (being new to Wikepedia)the necessity to include only neutral content, so sorry and thanks for your ammendments.

I do think though, that there where some very neutral, pertinent facts which could have happily remained, and would assume that knowledge is in the spirit of Wikepedia?

For example: That she has Anglo/New Zealand parentage. Carolines participation in a rally from London to Saigon. That she lives just outside Bath.

I must say I do resent being threatened with tarring as a "vandal" if I was further to ammend the article. Doesnt seem to be in the pioneering spirit of free information on the internet and i found this quite intimidating, especially as I'd only made a faux par.

Regards Amanda

Strike-off in error

Pardon my misunderstanding of guidelines. I have reverted the strike-offs. Prashanthns 18:56, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From ImpuMozhi

Hi - - I am trying to archive the records of edits I made before becoming a registered user. The procedure I am employing is as per advice available from this page: Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit.

You could help me by telling me in detail how I can better achieve this objective. If the edits I made under various IP addresses could be credited to user ImpuMozhi's records, that would be ideal. Please advice and refrain from deleting anything meanwhile.

I am removing the delete message you put up, so that some other administrator does not become proactive in deleting that page. Please reply. Regards, ImpuMozhi

England and Argentina football rivalry

Just wanted to say thanks and well done for all your contributions to this article. I think it's not a bad little piece now, and hopefully it will continue to expand. Angmering 20:33, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the note you left in Angmering's page. I think it is worth noting. A lot of the Argentine teams have some english in their names (Argentinos Juniors, Boca Juniors, River Plate, Racing Club, Quilmes Athletic Club, Newell's Old Boys, etc) and the even the first organized Argentine team was made of English expats (I think it was Alumni), see Football_in_Argentina. Even more, the first time Argentina beast England (At Wembley, I think) is still remebered and celebrated back home. Maybe we should even mention some instances of the Intercontinental Cup, one with Estudiantes de la Plata playing very rough (I think against Nottingham Forest) and another where Liverpool FC refused to play Boca Juniors (scheduling conflicts, was the official word).

Unfortunately we also imported the hooligan tradition, too. :(

Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 21:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Flat T'owt

Please let me know on my talk page why this article should be deleted. What would make it notable? Lewispb 21:06, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. During the past 48 hours, another 100 people have apparantly joined!

Thank a lot

Thank you for helping me on those two articles, East Sea Fleet and North Sea Fleet. I was extremely tried and was half a sleep when i did those two.

Jin

I noticed you moved the page Jin (rapper) to Jin Au-Yeung. In the future please use the page move button (it's located to the right of the history button) when you move pages because it preserves the page history. When you copy and paste to move, the history is lost. If the page already exists where you want to move the page to, put up a request on Wikipedia:Requested moves. I have placed a request for a history merge on Wikipedia:Requested moves — J3ff 08:49, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Craig James

Thanks. I noticed it said he was a broadcaster, so that disqualified it from being speedied. A quick Google search found me some sites I thought I could use to quickly stub up something, but then it turned out to be a bit more involved than I had originally anticipated, as the ABC bio turned out to be factually incorrect (e.g., was not NFL Rookie of the Year, but Patriots' Rookie of the Year). So as I started resolving those issues, I figured "in for a penny, in for a pound," so I just went whole hog. :) howch e ng {chat} 08:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

For accidentally deleting your vote in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dorchester Town footballers while undoing another person's edit - that was quite careless of me. Apologies. Qwghlm 08:32, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bryan Hoffa tag.

Good day,

Earlier this week you tagged the Bryan Hoffa article with a note that says:

"This article does not cite its references or sources."

Could you please provide examples of items that would satisfy the requirement of the note? Folajimi^(talk)

"Digging a bit further ... which is a positive."

Well, how does that relate to the state of the tag at issue here??? Folajimi 14:31, 9 January 2006 (UTC)^(talk)[reply]

Does the MySpace page provide sufficient evidence for removal of the tag? Folajimi 22:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)^(talk)[reply]

Do AMG listings qualify as sufficient evidence? Folajimi 23:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)^(talk)[reply]

That's all I've got. As for the homonym, I believe AMG goofed-up. Folajimi 23:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)^(talk)[reply]

My suspicion is that tinyurl links are not appropriate for an encyclopaedia. As such, I need to find out how a clean URL is obtained for AMG pages... Folajimi 02:43, 10 January 2006 (UTC)^(talk)[reply]

I changed the tinyurl link to what it points to because otherwise it wasn't letting me save an edit in another part of the page. Sorry if it is not the correct link. Flagboy 18:21, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bih-sut

Hi, Interesting map links you posted - I wasn't aware of them. I have a gut-feeling this article is actually correct but it's completely unverifiable at present and should be deleted unless someone can come up with printed sources. Dlyons493 Talk 01:20, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Antonio "Kitín" Muñoz Valcárcel

I "fixed" the Antonio "Kitín" Muñoz Valcárcel page where you were debating an AfD notice. I think it is better now. See my comments at Talk:Antonio "Kitín" Muñoz Valcárcel--SVTCobra 01:34, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the compliment. Due to what I learned looking him up, I feel obliged to upgrade his wife's page, too. Oi, this is starting to feel like work. lol--SVTCobra 02:27, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daily Illini

I won't quibble with your deletion of the information on the move to the new building, since I think information about the move is not particularly encyclopedic. However, I don't think stating that that the DI is moving into a new Illini Media building that is nearly complete falls under "possible future events & speculation upon them". No part of that is really speculative. -- DS1953 ^talk 01:11, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It works for me. -- DS1953 ^talk 02:15, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Esther Sandoval

Hi Sliggy, how you doing? First of all, let me thank you for the rephrasing of the aritcle which I wrote. You did a damn good job and made it even better. Second, I removed the tag which you posted. You see,Sandoval's Awards and Recognition were printed in the newspaper which I cited. There are times when a book or a paper contain certain information that you may not find in the internet yet and therefore the reference is cited. Now, I know that you will not doubt me because as you can see in my User Page I'm a repected member in the comunity. Again, I'm impressed with your work and I believe that you are an asset to the Wiki project. Take care, Tony the Marine 04:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Took your advice, Cheers Tony the Marine 17:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Margaret Thatcher: 1983 Landslide

You state in talk:Margaret Thatcher (about 1983 election result):

The observable, NPOV electoral fact is that the Alliance split the left and not the right.

No it isn't. Opinion polls from the time indicate that Alliance voters were evenly divided between the other two main parties as their second choice. Thus the Alliance cannot be assumed to be part of a "left" bloc alongside Labour, and you cannot assume that if the two groupings fought had the election together then all Labour and (especially) Alliance voters would have voted for that bloc.

Combined with first past the post and this is another reason for the landslide. Note that the Alliance got ~24% of the vote in 1983, Labour ~27%, but the Conservatives remained at roughly the same as 1979 at ~43%

You can't infer anything from this. You seem to be assuming that the shift in vote was a single bloc, all in the same direction, i.e. that the swing in votes was due simply to a large group of ex-Labour voters shifting en masse to the Alliance, with no other shift in vote. It was not that simple, and in psephology you can never assume that things are that simple. If you want to present that as what happened, you need evidence. It could equally have been (and this probably did happen) that many voters switched from Conservative to Alliance, and others switched from Labour to the Conservatives.

I have changed the main entry to state simply that the split opposition in 1983 enabled the Conservatives to win on 43% of the vote, which is all that can be inferred from the raw national results without delving into detailed psephological analyses. This does not mean that the Conservatives would not have won if the opposition had not been split: if Alliance voters were evenly divided between Tories and Labour in terms of second preferene then the Tories would have won on over 50% had the Alliance not existed. Flagboy 18:21, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

African-American

Howdy Sliggy,

I noticed you left a comment in the recent deaths log that "African-American" was not a nationality, and I wanted to discuss this with you. I am an American of color who doesn't use that term as a self-descriptor, in part because I am multiracial. However, in certain contexts, "African-American" is entirely appropriate as a quasi-nationality (or ethnic) descriptor. Black figures of the American Civil Rights Movement, and their subsequent admirers, sometimes feel a just disenchantment with their "nation"; descendents of slaves, they know that their physical birthplace is the historical result of a great crime against humanity, the African slave trade. These blacks are no longer wholly African, to be sure, and have many affinities with their birthland, especially now that the tensions of racial hatred are somewhat eased; however, the fact remains that "American" is not their sole identity -- unlike America's "pioneers", the ancestors of most black Americans did not come to the continent willingly. To distinguish themselves, and claim a limited share of the culture heritage of which they were criminal deprived, some black Americans choose to self-identify as "African-American." This choice is grounded in painful historical truths, and should be respected. I don't wish to make a fuss over this, but I wanted you to understand why "African-American" is an important self-desciptor for some people, and appropriate, even in small obituaries, where the deceased is known to have so identified himself or herself.

I am presently attempting a wiki-vacation, so I will sign informally; but I will monitor your talk page, should you wish to discuss this further. Best wishes, Xoloz

Cameron article

C'mon, how is Eton not leading?! That is not POV, its a statement of fact. Would you be comfortable with "revered" instead? There is merit to noting that he had a privileged education, which someone reading the article say from America might not realise was constituted by Eton and Brasenose. Jdcooper 03:16, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, I dunno, it just strikes me that we're cutting off our nose to spite our face. I know "leading" is kind of a wooly term, but everyone would know what it means, and everyone who has heard of it would probably agree? Its not so important that I'm going to get arsy over it! But I just think that sometimes POV is ok if its everyone's POV.. Jdcooper 15:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Teresa Ciepły and her 100 m race 3rd place at the 1962 European Championships

Hi there. Both the Polish and German Wikipedia offer evidence for this. The Polish Wikipedia merely states it in pl:Teresa Ciepły, but the German Wikipedia article on the 1962 European Championships has a full medal table and times of the top 3 finishers. See here: [1].

I also found this compendium of results on the web when searching for "Teresa Cieply 100 m" in Google: [2]. Quoting from "1962 Beograd" ("Beograd" must be "Belgrade" in Finnish):

      WOMEN
           
      100 m
       1 Dorothy Hyman      GBR      11,3
       2 Jutta Heine        FRG      11,3
       3 Teresa Ciepla      POL      11,4
       4 Daphne Arden       GBR      11,5
       5 Hannelore Raepke   GDR      11,6
       6 Elzbieta Szyroka   POL      11,8

I hope this is satisfactory. I will now undo your deletions of this finish in Teresa Ciepły (a simple revert is impossible as there have been other edits since). -- Mareklug ^talk 23:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I included a more reliable reference to her bronze in 1962 in the article. Sliggy 16:46, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cities of London and Westminster

You regard the following statement as POV and superlative:

Although more politically mixed, these too have drifted to the Tories since the implementation of former Westminster Council leader Shirley Porter's Building Stable Communities programme of the late 1980s. Even at the 1997 general election, Labour fell short by several thousand votes and the seat must now be considered safely Conservative in all circumstances.

Why? Buidling Stable Communities is a matter of public record as are the political intentions which lay behind it; the dramatic political changes it helped foster in wards like Bayswater and Churchill are clearly visible in changes in party share of the vote from 1986-1994 (http://www.election.demon.co.uk/wcc/wcc.html) a period when they Conservative share of the vote in almost all London Boroughs went into steep decline. And, short of, the complete annihilation of the British Conservative Party or a split in the English right a la the Canadian Tory meltdown, there is no prospect of CLW being lost by the Tories.

I can, of course, litter the article with references but I'd rather use a bit of common sense and keep the flow of the article and leave the reference war to university students with too much time on their hands.

Gerry Lynch 16:06, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that I have responded on the talk page of Cities of London and Westminster, where this message was also posted, so as to have the most open discussion possible. Sliggy 16:54, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

La Salle College

Please stop making unnecessary decapitalizations to the article La Salle College. In the article, colony and war refers directly to Colony of Hong Kong and World War II. They are short-forms for the proper nouns, and should also be capitalized. De ryck C. 02:52, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Medal template use in non-olympic contexts

I noticed when editing a page that uses Template:MedalTopEAA (European track and field (athletics) championships medal table top) that Template:MedalGold, Template:MedalSilver, and Template:MedalBronze have the undesirable side-effect of adding the page to an olympic medal category.

So I created new templates just for use in non-olympic contexts: Template:MedalGoldGeneric, Template:MedalSilverGeneric, and Template:MedalBronzeGeneric which don't do any adding to categories.

I went ahead and updated all the pages affected by this that I found linking to Template:MedalTopEAA, but I don't know about other non-olympic medal table contexts.

(This pertains to your edit on Teresa Ciepły when you added the Template:MedalTopEAA and its medal templates.) -- Mareklug ^talk 20:52, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glassesdirect

Just wanted to drop a "thanks" on behalf of Jiff78 for the Glassesdirect rewrite (just in cast he doesn't beat me to it). I think there may have been a teensy-weensy spam motive involved initially, but I also think Jiff78 was making an honest effort, as well. Nice job on the rewrite, I've changed my vote to keep --Bugwit grunt / scribbles 23:57, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a thank you on the deletion page, it took me a little longer to find this page. I told you I was new to Wikipedia :) Thank you again Sliggy & Bugwit for you help in this I really appreciate it. I think the reason the article looked spammy was possibly because I was looking at some of the other company articles when writing it, and so though it would be acceptable. It's a great shame not all the editors are as thoughtful as you both. Cheers.Jiff78 01:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

La Salle College again

About the Bauhinia Bowl problem: LSC had won Bauhinia Bown only 21 times, and 2006 championship is undecided up till the time being. Saying that LSC had won Bauhinia Bown 24 times and that she has already won the 2006 championship is strict vandalism. Next time when you see this just revert without hesitation with an "RVV" summary. --D e ryc k C. 06:12, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: See what you've reverted TO, instead of from, and you'll understand. Somebody, probably a skillful vandalist, added a few years to the trophy list. --D e ryc k C. 04:23, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bioresonance

afd. Midgley 20:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fish transitions

I'm willing to have a go at a new diagram, and will try to sketch some creatures on Saturday with the aim of scanning them and sticking them on a gif as discussed at Image talk:41525972 fish transition 416.gif. Let me know if Nature are likely to give clearance making this redundant, and if a horizontal approach will suit ok. ...dave souza, talk 17:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Life
		Hereby I would like to award Sliggy with this Barnstar of Life for his sharp argument shown in the edition of La Salle College. D e ryc k C. 08:42, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help! I don't know where are you from, but your neutral comment really made the situation a lot better. --D e ryc k C. 08:42, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Lau

That's fair enough. My understanding was that there was deletion vandalism going on, but when I looked more closely, it turned out the bio of Paul Lau was somewhat misplaced in the article. It seems that Deryck Chan felt it should be included, but large parts of the biography are neither notable nor directly relevant to La Salle. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 21:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simple links

Hello. Please note that you don't need to write [[Egypt|Egyptian]] (as you did in recent deaths), since just writing [[Egypt]]ian makes the whole word, not just the part in brackets, appear as a clickable link, and it links to the article whose name is in the brackets. Similarly [[evolution]]ary, [[dogma]]tic, [[hyphen]]ated, [[rabbi]]nical, [[apocrypha]]l, [[science]]s, [[dog]]s, etc. The longer form can be used for things like [[history|histories]]. Michael Hardy 19:12, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hugh Kawharu - bolding of titles

Hi. At Hugh Kawharu you unbolded the "Sir" in the first sentence. I initially did the same and then bolded it again. I can't find explicit guidance in the MOS but the example of Dame Ellen Patricia MacArthur at MoS:BIO#Honorific_prefixes has "Dame" bolded. Other examples I've seen have it bolded, eg, Winston Churchill, Robert Peel, John Major. Do you know definitively how it should be? Nurg 01:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Waterloo via Weybridge railway service article (revisited for you)

I think maybe this article should be worth mentioning. I am thinking of putting this up for WP:RM to be moved to the Woking Line. Even though it is on the South Western Main Line, it is almost in effect a seperate commuter line. Also the Woking Line came up with many hits. What do you think? Simply south 22:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, i haven't quite put it up yet as i have been busy but will soon. Simply south 20:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A bit on the late side but i am putting it up for WP:RM now. Simply south 23:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Complete change. Is it okay if i put this as a redirect to SWML? Simply south 15:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Handbags

Please see Talk:Argentina_and_England_football_rivalry#Handbags and [3] Jooler 22:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two-time/twice

Are we meant to follow this logic and use thrice winner? If a person can two-time another person, they can three- and four-time somebody (and there isn't another word for four-time in the sequence). To me it seems a bit lame to not use two-time because someone can't look past its dating connotation. - Dudesleeper 13:03, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the word for four-time is tetrice. W guice 12:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Thomson

Der!, I was too overzealous, wasn;t thinking, apologies, heheh. -FateSmiled&DestinyLaughed 15:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Brolly

Oh dear - sorry, I was doing a rewrite at the same time as you, it would seem. I think I have covered pretty much the same things as you (not surprising, given identical sources) but please feel free to put your text back, if you prefer. -- ALoan (Talk) 16:58, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning La Salle College

Wikipedia is not meant to be an encyclopedia with exact details only. Instead, it serves as a place where people can read and know more about something, a conservatory of general knowledge. Therefore, as long as the details are accurate and neutrally written, they deserve to stay. This applies to the case of the building details in La Salle College. Thanks.

One more question: are you from Hong Kong? --Der yck C. 00:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My reply would be: Yes, they are supposed to become infinitely long, provided that the new details are correct, accurate and concise. The articles grow longer and longer, and finally split. That's the way Wikipedia grows. --Der yck C. 15:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Donna Edwards

An article that you have been involved in editing, Donna Edwards, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donna Edwards. Marylandstater 17:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC) Thank you.[reply]

Image permission problem with Image:Eric A Ash.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Eric A Ash.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 08:20, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image permission problem with Image:Eric A Ash3.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Eric A Ash3.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 08:20, 30 January 2009 (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) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (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) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]