User talk:Solver

Please note: If you leave a comment, I will respond to it on this page unless you request that I respond on your talk page.

Hello

Sveiki! I just wanted to say hello from a new Latvian wikipedian (though one raised in the U.S. and thus with less-than-perfect grammar) to a more established one. (Ardievu 08:05, 5 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Great to see that the Latvian Wikipedian base is expanding now! Enjoy your editing :). Solver 23:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On X-Files

I was just wondering... do you think it is a good idea to put all X-Files episode descriptions on one page of the season, as you have done in moving separate articles? I can see the advantages of this, but am worried that the pages of seasons then may become very big and hard to overlook with all episodes filled in, as I'm currently working on adding more? Thanks for taking the care of articles, however! Solver 15:20, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I doubt they'll get too big. Take a look at Futurama (TV series) episode pages for a look at how this sort of thing can work. Keepin them on one page (per season) will allow us to keep the formatting of each summary consistent. It's always posible that at some future date these can be spilt off if they are truly too large, but I doubt it. There is only so much you can write about these. -- Netoholic @ 15:42, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Good point, seems like a rather decent example to follow. Thanks for the help. Solver 15:48, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

765,000 volt power transmission line seems to exist. Do you still want to cancel the VfD? Niteowlneils 00:44, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I do, I hit the page at the moment when it was nonsensical. Solver 18:43, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Y S Rajashekar Reddy

Under which speedy deletion criterion does this article fall? --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 20:01, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The same question for The Gold Bug Variations. I've removed the tag from there; "poorly written and somewhat POV" is certainly not a case for speedy deletion. --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 20:02, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)Alexkrycek.jpg]]. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what this means, just let me know where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. For now, the image is marked {{unverified}}. Thanks so much, Superm401 06:19, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading Image:Alexkrycek.jpg. Please leave a note on that page about the source of the image because of copyright law. Thank you. --Ellmist 06:16, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The image is a screencap from an X-Files ep, either Tunguska or Terma, I think. I recognize the bunch of bearded Russian dudes in the background. {{film-screenshot}} should cover it.

That's correct, a Tunguska screencap, and the film screenshot tag covers it, thanks for applying that :). Solver 22:43, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Cheers, mate. They seem to have got bored and gone away now! Anilocra 15:46, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'll keep watching his contribs page and your userpage history, though, for a bit more, just in case. Solver 15:47, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No more lyrics

Please stop adding lyric links to song articles. Those are copyright violations, which we can not have in our articles. Please go back over those articles to which you have added lyric links and remove them (I have already removed some of them for you). -- LGagnon 23:10, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

I was told on the Help Desk that adding lyrics constitutes copyright violations, but NOT adding links to lyric sites. Referrence: here, where User:Cyrius tells me that links are acceptable. I'll stop adding lyrics for now, but I want to see this dispute resolved. I am not a legal expert, but as far as I know, educational use is typically an exception for the copyright law - and here on Wikipedia lyric links serve an educational non-commercial value (just like the lyric sites themselves are not illegal under the copyright law). Therefore, I'd appreciate some more input on this. Solver 13:57, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Whether or not using them here or somewhere else counts as "educational" is still questionable. You can use a small amount of the lyrics (2 or so lines) under fair use in the articles, but anything more would be a copyvio. As for other sites, few of them ask for permission, and just as few are meant to be educational sites. Thus, most of them are very possibly illegal. And linking to illegal sites could be potentially bad for Wikipedia. I'm not a legal expert either, but I wouldn't doubt that Wikipedia would be in legal trouble if we linked to illegal sites. I doubt we could get away with linking to warez sites or other contraban sites, so this should be treated no different. -- LGagnon 17:58, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
  - I agree insofar that linking to illegal sites, like warez, is bad for Wikipedia. My point is that lyrics sites are legal (note that they always say that lyrics are copyright of respective owners and that they are provided for educational use). I've done some Googling and it appears those sites are legal, and moreover, there are many big lyric sites, and I don't hear of anyone trying to take them down as copyvios. My assumption is that if a site says "all material is provided for educational purposes", then it is so. Do we have someone with legal background here on Wikipedia that we could ask? Solver 18:02, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Eugene Onegin (opera)

Here's what I suggest:

Make a judgement: would this material be worth having? If not, just delete it.
If it's worth keeping, then paraphrase or cut sufficiently so that there should be no copyright issue in the resulting text. In short, use it as you would use any other reference: this includes explicitly crediting the original source (see Wikipedia:Cite sources).

The situation isn't ideal, but it's the one we're faced with. Note that either way we are stuck with a copyvio in the history; if the original copyright owner complains, we need to get a developer to actually fix it. However, this almost never happens. -- Jmabel | Talk 16:31, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

I've paraphrased some, cut some and hopefully it's OK now. We won't have a problem with the copyright owners, as there is still very little respect for copyright in Russia, and they certainly won't raise a complaint with us. But either way, the article should no longer constitute a copyvio. Solver 19:31, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sim City 4 Fan Sites

I noticed that you have previously reverted a user named Superchad for adding links to various Sim City 4 fansites. I'm not sure if this dispute has been settled or not but I want to ask a question or two regarding one of the sites. You are quoted as saying in your edit summary that you "Remove DudyConstructor", because its a "non-notable site with extremely little content". I want to ask how exactly you define 'extremely little content'. Superchad also has posted what he has said to be "his company site" however this had nothing on it, and I wouldn't mind this be deleted. But the DudyConstructor site has thousands of posts at its forums, and an exchange for its members to share their creations. I think that the amount of information in the forums at DudyConstructor is a little more than "extremely little content". If thats the case, then Simtropolis can be deleted also because it is the same format; forums and exchanges, only on a much larger scale. It's not like we're making these articles, you know. -- Riffsyphon1024 07:48, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:External links. It says that we should have one fansite (or alright, that is preferred). Going along with that, DudyConstructor indeed has way too little content - way too little to be the only fansite represented. I've also only reverted Superchad once in Sim City 4, the real problem lies with Age of Empires III where I and other users have revertd him numerous times as he insisted on adding a link to a certain clan site. Solver 20:35, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Understood. -- Riffsyphon1024 01:32, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)

Brjatlick

Hi this is Brjatlick, you went to delete some of my pages and I'd really like if you didn't, as I want to be able to send them to friends and people to show that I wrote an article. But everything I put up people are trying to delete it - and the oy carumba joke, that's funny! and I really do make frankensauce, I promise you.

See What Wikipedia is not. You're not supposed to add jokes or articles about personal stuff here. Try to write an article about something else instead. Your idea to start on a manga article was a better one. Also, check out the tutorial. Solver 21:57, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi this is Brjatlick, you went to delete some of my pages and I'd really like if you didn't, as I want to be able to send them to friends and people to show that I wrote an article. But everything I put up people are trying to delete it - and the oy carumba joke, that's funny! and I really do make frankensauce, I promise you. Sorry, I guess the oy carumba thing is kind of nonsense - but the frankensauce is real, and there are plenty of people called baldy or ol' baldy, and Slut Girl is awesme. Brjatlick 21:59, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Check out that link I posted above. The Frankensauce is a personal thing anyway, and doesn't belong here. Also, we don't include slang and word definitions here, as they are not really encyclopedia articles, despite the fact that a lot of people may be called Baldy. As for Slut Girl, you see that a vote is undergoing and the article might actually be kept. Note that Slut Girl is only a vote for deletion (so people vote and decide whether to delete), but the other pages are speedy deletion candidates (which means, usually, that they get deleted within a few minutes). Solver 22:02, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can I keep the Frankensauce recipe on my homepage? How do you indent? Is that the colons?

Indent this Brjatlick 22:04, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the colons are indents. Try the Sandbox for experimenting with markup. I guess yes, you can keep your recipe on your user page here. Generally, your user page should contain stuff related to Wikipedia, but it's normal to have some personal stuff there, too, many of us have something about ourselves, so if you want to include a recipe, feel free to. here is a good list of guidelines about user pages. Take a bit of time to read the different help pages (you have the links now) and it will be a lot easier for you. Solver 22:08, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's not hateful, it's true

Ariel Sharon is a Jewish terrorist. How could you call that vandalism or hateful? (was added by User:Dick Upton)

Well, it is hateful towards most Jewish people, but more importantly, it's in the violation of one of the fundamental Wikipedia policies, the neutral point of view. Labeling Sharon (or Arafat or Abbas) a terrorist is NOT neutral in any way. These are all definitely controversial persons, but labeling someone a terrorist is not the way to work here, please read the NPOV page. Solver 13:40, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Darth Tater?

You are probably not going to believe tis but Darth Tater seems to be a genuine product. Perhaps the article is non-notable trivia but it isn't quite nonsense. --Doc Glasgow 22:31, 7 May 2005 (UTC) (not the creator)[reply]

I Googled for it and was about 97% sure that it's a joke. If it's a genuine product nonetheless, then I am absolutely amazed at the imagination of its creators :). Solver 22:35, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

External Links

There seems to be some dispute over what justifies an external link in the Age of Empires III article that I was just hoping could be resolved. The links that you are consistently removing should be quite useful to visitors of Wikipedia, and there was no conflict over whether or not they should be included before. I was just curious why you've decided to remove them now.

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't see the External Links link you provided. Thanks for helping clear this up anyways.

(above added by User:SoggyFrog)

Yes, to clear it up again, the reason I keep removing those links is Wikipedia:External links policy. Please note that addition of other links might be justified if there indeed appears another site with a lot of non-duplicated content, but that's something for after AoE3 is released, and not certain even then. You'll notice that most other games only have one fansite link, too, which is the biggest fansite - for instance, that goes for Age of Empires II. Solver 12:02, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The External Links Policy suggests a directory of fansites in extreme cases, and it seems that there will be a problem here if only one site is provided. The change has been made, and I don't think there's anything worth contesting; people can simply visit the directory. Anyways, if there are changes to be made there, edits won't have to be made on Wikipedia. SoggyFrog 20:29, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It does not constitute an extreme case now. The game isn't even released. So unlike other games, there are no fansites with a lot of different content. There are a few traditional Age sites that cover AoE3 (Through The Ages, Planet Age of Empires, Age of Empires Heaven), but the information there is generally the same. Plus, there are a couple of useless personal sites that are definitely not notable enough. At this point though, it's really not necessary to have a listing.

If you still disagree, I am probably going to ask for someone else to comment on this issue. Solver 22:52, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

I know it's delayed, but I'm posting here to say thanks for the welcome you left on my Talk page last week. :) I just realized I thanked you there, but forgot to thank you here. So thanks! ManekiNeko 23:53, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that, brings a smile to my face :). Solver 23:56, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please check your images

I noticed that you have some images in the category Category:Images with unknown source. Due to the vast number of images in this category (12000+), and the fact that, lacking a source, they present considerable copyright uncertanty, Jimbo has stated, and added to the Criteria for Speedy Deletion, "Images in category "Images with unknown source" or "Images with unknown copyright status" which have been in the category for more than 7 days, regardless of when uploaded." This means the images can, and will, be deleted with no notice. To see a list of all the images you've uploaded(at least, under this username), review the upload log. You might also find User:Pearle/by-author-Category:Images_with_unknown_source.txt to be useful(search for your username). If neither of those work, you can find a list of all the images you uploaded(mixed in with all the images you edited) by viewing your contributions by namespace. If you have any questions, please let me know. Specifically, Image:Radiotornis.jpg, and Image:Radiotornis2.jpg. JesseW, the juggling janitor 20:19, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

State anthem of the Udmurt Republic

Great job on the translation. Really useful and nicely done. Thanks --JJay 00:36, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Solver 16:18, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your advice on the chronic wound page

Thanks for answering my question! I think that what I did is pretty much like what you said. I made a separate article with the pictures on it, and linked to it from chronic wound. My only concern was that someone might see the images of chronic wounds page and say "Hey! This isn't an article!" and maybe delete it. Is this the way people handle the shock sites? I didn't just want to link to image:chronic wound 1 and 2 because there are two, which would be more work for people to have to load, and because on the image page it's not laid out nicely with captions and stuff. What do you think? Thanks again for the help! Delldot 00:32, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, that wasn't really what I meant, but your way seems fine, too. I meant not creating a new article, but merely uploading the pictures and linking to the respective picture pages from the article. For example, [[images of chronic wounds]] is an article, but [[:Image:Interference-colors.jpg]] is a link to an image page. The code to link to an image like that is [[:Image:wiki.png|link]].

That works well if you want to place several links from within the text. If you want to have all the images readily accessible on one page, then you can just keep it as you did. It's a guideline not to create subpages for articles, however, there are precedents for pages that are merely images. See images of castles or images of plants. These are good examples, in my opinion, of picture page organization. I think your way of handling the issue is right. Solver 00:44, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for taking the time to help me. I guess if you don't think anyone will object to it too much, I'll just leave it like it is and see if anyone says anything. Peace, Delldot 04:51, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How to revert

How'd you revert that post vandalism so quickly? I'm looking for a way to do that easily. Can you reply on my talk page? thanks, Jordanhurley

Eaglecbr and 69.134.149.145

Persistent, isn't he? :-) - Orioneight 01:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Quite so :). By the way, I just looked at the guidelines, and they say that, while blanking one's talk page is a hostile act, they don't say anything about it being vandalism automatically. Since the user has only spammed once and the rest of his edits are blanking, perhaps he should be allowed to do so? Solver 01:29, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're right . . . besides, wiki is getting all slooooooooooooow on me, and reverting is getting old. I'll be keeping an eye on him though. Maybe there's a decent contributor in there somewhere . . . - Orioneight 01:42, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Although blanking your user page is a little uncalled for. - Orioneight 01:44, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but at least that's a new thing for the guy to have fun with :). Oh well, I'm going to bed now anyway. Thanks! Solver 01:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think your wrong, but its all cool. User:whothehellcares 01:45, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Page blanking is labeled "childish vandalism" at Wikipedia:Vandalism#Types_of_vandalism. Ergbert 01:48, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My Apologies

My apologies to you sir or madam. I have come to find that people have been vandalising in my name, asking for my "release". Just let it be known that it'll never happen again, and that I wish there to be no hard feelings between us. I will be good and you and wikipedia will never be bothered by anyone claiming to help me. Rafterman 03:18, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Solver 14:06, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WRT WP:PNT

How many languages do you know, actually? I can't imagine a person that can read Sanskrit and Turkish and Portuguese and Malay and whatnot. Or do you use a machine language-guesser? --tyomitch 13:58, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know all those languages, or else I'd know what the articles are about :). There are only four languages that I have a very good understanding of, although I'm currently learning more. I am, though, very interested in languages, and so I can identify most languages spoken in Europe and some major non-European ones, and I have at least a basic understanding of most European languages. Russian helps to understand other Slavic languages, English and Latin helps me with Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and the like. As far as those machine language guessers, I have actually found them unreliable, they often make absolutely wild guesses. Thanks for hte nice words, though, I'm just going to add another portion of pages to WP:PNT now :). Solver 14:02, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Although I can't see how Russian+English+Latin could help you to understand such weird European languages as Hungarian or Finnish, I'm in admiration for your knowledge :-) Keep up the good work! --tyomitch 15:00, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's the trick, Hungarian and Finish are so weird that they're very easy to at least identify correctly :). Thanks again! Solver 15:10, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Karlis Ulmanis

Please stop referring to Karlis Ulmains as the President of Latvia. It is insulting to the memories of his victims. Ulmanis overthrew the legitimate government of Latvia and had his enemies sent to the Liepaja concentration camp. Ulmanis usurped power. He was _never_ elected President of Latvia. Also, he openly invited the Soviet forces into Latvia, undercutting any argument in favor of an invasion theory. The Soviets only did the same thing as Ulmanis... usurp power and punish anyone perceived as an enemy. Stop championing the dictator.

You need to familiarize yourself with the Wikipedia neutral point of view policy. I know very well what Ulmanis did, but he declared himself President of Latvia and he served as such, although his regime was violent and a dictatorship. However, Wikipedia has no place at all for personal views or characterizations of people as good or bad. Solver 17:11, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Solver, you have answered fairly and to the point. I do wish, however, for a little more specificity about the facts. For example: how many political prisoners were there under Ulmanis, and what political parties did they represent? What was the nature of the "concentration camp" at Liepaja, and of the forced-labor program KU us said to have instituted in a mine somewhere? Just a brief, factual account of these things would be helpful. To judge from what my Russian friends think they know, someone out there (three guesses!) has been telling them that there was a terrible fascist dictator, that Jews were massacred in Latvia, &c, and blurring everything together so as to give the impression that KU was responsible for the Holocaust. (They haven't thought up any way to blame VVF for it, apparently.) I have no desire either to whitewash KU or to blame him for more than his share of ills, but I think that a brief, factual statement of what he did that most of us would not want to condone, and if necessary of what he did *not* do of that sort, would bring more light into a discussion that now is characterized mostly by heat.

stephen.r 16:30 (pdt) 20 August 2006

PS: For an example in English, have a look at www.answers.com/topic/k-rlis-ulmanis Part of this purports to be the Wikipedia article, and is in fact the Wikipedia article interpolated by someone who wants to confuse the Ulmanis era with the Nazi occupation and who misspells every Latvian word he introduces. (I have sent a message to the archons of this site complaining about it.)--stephen.r

You know, at the moment, I'm tempted to say that Wikipedia articles on Latvian history - the Ulmanis regime and otherwise - are in a pretty horrible shape, representing a mix of different historical interpretations and opinions, plus a lack of references. I don't want to make my own version of history, or get involved with the historical controversy - I'd sure welcome some better articles on the subject here, though. Solver 23:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfC/poll – Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker: one article or two?

Greetings! I hope you're well. I see that you have been involved with the above issue previously. To that end, I thought I'd notify you of this request for comment (RfC)/poll to determine if there's sufficient support for a unified article (as is) or two. I encourage you to participate and to weigh in ... help solve this dilemma! :) In any event, thanks for your co-operation! E Pluribus Anthony 02:51, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thank you for your vote. I observed that you were/are involved in the issue, hence my prior note to you. As well, if you had a chance to observe the RfC discussion (and earlier), I had quite a dust-up with an antagonist who thought I was commenting too much ... Forgive me for any bitterness and if I am commenting too much, but he deserved what he got. All is fine now! Anyhow, thanks again for weighing in. :) E Pluribus Anthony 16:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and it's no problem at all! Solver 17:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Latvia portal?

Sveiki! As you may have noticed, there are now portals for Estonia, Lithuania, Belarus, Russia, Finland, Poland... but there is no Latvia portal. I completely agree with your comment on your user page (that Category:Latvia is "probably one of the worst categories here on Wikipedia") and I wonder whether creating a portal might help draw more contributors (example: Portal:Lithuania). It would be nice to have a place where those editing or creating Latvia-related articles could drop notes, instead of Wikipedians doing so only on talk pages. Or would such a portal simply languish? What do you think, Solver? --Pēteris Cedriņš 10:15, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a good idea. If other relatively small countries like Estonia can have a portal, so can Latvia. Besides, I have recently noticed an increasing number of Latvian/Latvia-related editors.It's probably worth a try - a lot of things need fixing. Category:Latvia is horrible, and the main article on Latvia is pretty much a disaster too, right now. I'm not very proficient with creating table layouts, though, but I'll definitely think more about this. Do you have anyone else that might be interested? Solver 14:40, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I started the page -- Portal:Latvia -- but found that I have little talent for figuring out how to do the layout without a lot of trial and error! There is a template (the same used for Portal:Lithuania), so go ahead and add things, using that as a basis. I will, too, whenever I can, and I will ask around to see if I can get others interested. Any suggestions for a featured article? --Pēteris Cedriņš 16:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see about using other templates for the portal, too. Unfortunately I'm a bit busy these days, but I'll try to do something. Logically, the featured article should be Latvia, but it's in far from a good state now. Geography of Latvia isn't very wikified, but more or less fine. Solver 16:38, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Peters Vecrumba just substantially expanded the Portal:Latvia, so you might want to take a look at it, esp. if you know anything about the easiest way to link it in. --Pēteris Cedriņš 08:41, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay Lohan

Was there a reason for your reversion, if I may ask? Radio Kirk talk to me 00:11, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was reverting a different edit... one by User:81.107.39.176. This is the edit I wanted to revert, but I apparnetly made a mistake. Sorry. Solver 01:12, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was my guess, but I wasn't sure. Thanks :) Radio Kirk talk to me 05:33, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

False Friends of the Slavist

Please have a look at wikibooks:False Friends of the Slavist. With your language skills, you can help us very much there, though there is not too much to be done. See also wikibooks:Talk:False Friends of the Slavist for details on what is still needed. Thanks in advance! --Daniel Bunčić 18:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for your kind words on my talk page. Glad your edit got through :) Nach0king 09:46, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And a double thanks for the barnstar! Nach0king 18:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome :). Solver 19:54, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Patrick tilley.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Patrick tilley.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stan 05:27, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latvian article on WP:PNT

Hello, Solver. We have an article on WP:PNT that we think might be Latvian. Hopefully, you could tell us a few things, like whether or not it is Latvian, and whether the article is worth translating. Thanks, RyanG e rbil10 (Drop on in!) 07:11, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sveiks

Tikai vēlējos sasveicināties un uzteikt sava vecā skolas biedra paveikto šeit Vikipēdijā. :) // Artis

Nav jau daudz, es šeit ko jēdzīgu daru tad, kad ir pilnīgs klusums citos projektos, kas tagad gan vairs tā nenotiek :)

Unspecified source for Image:Raimondspauls.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Raimondspauls.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may 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. Ptr ru 09:17, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tanith lee.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tanith lee.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

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

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. --Chowbok ☠ 19:41, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:John_brunner.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:John_brunner.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Ak-101.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Ak-101.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bryan Derksen 10:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Janis_cakste.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Janis_cakste.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:41, 15 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu badali ^(talk) 01:41, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Janis_cakste.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Janis_cakste.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. Abu badali ^(talk) 15:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Gustavs_zemgals.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gustavs_zemgals.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. howcheng {chat} 17:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Alberts_kviesis.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Alberts_kviesis.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. howcheng {chat} 17:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Alexkrycek.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Alexkrycek.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 19:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Alexkrycek.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Alexkrycek.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. —Angr 19:00, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Empireearth2box.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Empireearth2box.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:22, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Csm01.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Csm01.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) 21:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Swat4-screen2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Swat4-screen2.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 '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 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) 05:26, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Ctp2screen.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Ctp2screen.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 '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 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) 05:06, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Einars Repse.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Einars Repse.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:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
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. 72.88.40.120 (talk) 04:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Solver! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 3 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Raimonds Pauls - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Ctp2diplo.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Ctp2diplo.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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:14, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Swat4-screen1.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Swat4-screen1.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free 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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:03, 26 June 2012 (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) 22:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Alex Krycek

The article Alex Krycek has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline requirement nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) supplementary essay. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

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. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 23:50, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alex Krycek for deletion

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:47, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]