Thank you for voting in my RfA, which was unsuccessful with 19 support, 18 oppose, and 5 neutral. I have signed up for admin coaching and will retry later on in a couple more months.

Thanks again! - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 04:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Articles for creation needs your help!

WikiProject Articles for creation has done a tremendous job in working at WP:AFC over the past 7½ months. Thank you all for your hard work and dedication! Together, we've made the submission process easier and more streamlined, developed tools to make the process go faster for reviewers, and cut the backlog down to a mere fraction of what it once was. Well done! As you all are aware, however, our work is not quite yet done. The project still has 10 archive pages left to complete, which include over half a month's worth of submissions, many of which have not been completely reviewed. We need your help to finish looking over these neglected submissions so that we can finally remove the backlog notice from the page, and put an end to the more than two year old backlog that has been a thorn in our side for ages! Participants will receive an AFC Barnstar, so hurry up and help out while there's still work to be done! Make sure to sign in on the WikiProject's talk page so we know who is involved in what promises to be our final effort to complete this goal. Thank you for all your help! - Happy editing as always, Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this letter because you are listed as a participant in the Articles for creation WikiProject at WP:WPAFC. To avoid receiving further notices, please remove your name from the list. Thanks!

I do not go about Wikipedia on a witch hunt seeking down to remove specific articles for removal. I treat every article on an article by article basis, and in cases where I feel the article may not encyclopedic I send it off to AFD so that the community can decide its fate; not I. I do not mean offense should it be one of your articles, and rest assured I do run a subject through some searches before deciding if AFD or a {prod} is appropriate.

However your recent activity in this regard belies these sentiments. You should consider a Wikiholiday or perhaps stick to articles about which you have some knowledge instead of setting yourself up as a sort of prosecutor who whacks down a summons and then retires from the case. This is most evident in your AfD on Basil Catterns - all you have done is waste your own time and that of editors who do have a clue about the topic. Your US centric bias is evident. You have absolutely no idea of whether or not BC was notable - except that he was not a Seppo. If you want to have a go at an article about non-notable wastes of space have a go at Ernest Emerson or USS Illinois (BB-65) for starters. And when you finish those have a go at the endless articles on the third baseman who played for Pottsville Maroons in 1919 for seven games. But then again they must be notable. They're Americans. Albatross2147 (talk) 21:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article contains no references or citations and upon reading it several times and reading through WP:BIO felt that it best if the community decide if it be kept. --Ozgod (talk) 04:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the {{unreferenced|biography}} tag on this article, the text referenced by that tag at Wikipedia:Citing sources says:

Articles can be supported with references in two ways: the provision of general references – books or other sources that support a significant amount of the material in the article – and inline citations ...

so the absence of inline citations does not necessarily imply that the article is unreferenced. It is my contention that the publication of the New Brunswick Legislative Assembly can be considered a reliable source for information about a former member of that body. I agree that this article could be expanded and, in fact, flagged it as a stub. --Big_iron (talk) 18:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am puzzled at your placement of an A7 speedy tag on the article for Anthony Blond, "An early director and publisher of Private Eye", & a very well known literary agent, as documented in the article--by the extremely RS of an obit in the Times, which is a very selective source, and has generally been counted as sufficient for notability without further considerations. Obviously, I declined the tag. You're welcome to Afd, but i can't imagine it being deleted there. DGG (talk) 05:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks for your note; mistakes happen; no problem.DGG (talk) 18:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC).[reply]

I am also suprised by your prodding of Beto Carrero‎. If you look down in the article it says that he was the owner of the largest theme park in Latin America, Beto Carrero‎ World. He was also a musician and actor. Just because he died recently doesn't mean he isn't notable and the article is far from an obit. It also has an article in the pt wikipedia and some useful content can come from there. I hope you have not prodded and speedied for the same reason. Editorofthewiki 10:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, it just shows how much systemic bias we have around here. Don't worry, I'm creating the article. Editorofthewiki 19:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On my discussion page, what's with the 'tude huh? DO you have a problem with me trying to contribute a page to wikipedia?! I don't see what the big deal is, all you editors do is sit at your computer and try to find one thing wrong with wikipedia, well i know who not to ever cross again, jeez. Jonapello22 (talk) 03:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to personally thank you, Ozgod, for your participation in my recent RfB. I especially wanted to thank you for taking the time to clearly articulate your concerns; your comments were among the best constructive criticism I received during the discussion. I have heard the community's voice that they require more of a presence at RfA's of prospective bureaucrats, and I will do my best over the near future to demonstrate such a presence and allow the community to see my philosophy and practices in action. I am thankful and appreciative that in general, the community feels that I am worthy of the trust it requires of its bureaucrats, and I hope to continue to behave in a way that maintains your trust in me and my actions. I hope that over the near future, you will become comfortable and satisfied with my understanding of the particulars and subtleties inherent in the RfA process, and that I may be able to count on your support when I decide to once again undergo an RfB. If you have any suggestions, comments, or constructive criticisms, please let me know via talkpage or e-mail. Thank you again. -- Avi (talk) 17:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in WP:WQA#User:David Gerard in regards to incivility and bad faith assumptions at various AfD's. seicer | talk | contribs 17:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! You asked some questions on my Rfa which I must admit I didn't notice until just before, as they were added relatively late. I've answered them now and hope you are satisfied with the replies :) Enjoy, Poeloq (talk) 22:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just want to say thanks for participating in my RfA. Your opposition raised a valid point about overall participation and I am keeping that in mind going forward. I hope to earn your trust and support in future activities. Regards – Zedla (talk) 08:58, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thanks for your support in my recent RFA! The final result was 61/0/3, so I've been issued the mop! I'm extremely grateful for your confidence in me and will strive to live up to it. Thanks again! —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 07:27, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for assessing my Yuri Korolev entry. I'm really flattered that it was given "B" class, and not "Start" class. If there are any specific suggestions you have on how to make it better, please let me know. Miloluvr (talk) 18:21, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded with some suggestions here. I'm sorry it took me so long but I've been swamped, both online and in real-life (we have the builders in!!) and I had it in mind that your drive was due to start at the end of this month. What is the best way forward now? I'm reluctant to modify the drive page as it would somewhat take over. What I've done, I hope, is provide the components which some kind soul at Biography can use on the drive page. Suggestions welcomed, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 07:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 13:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've uploaded Image:Image:Darlin14a.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

I have tagged Image:Pigskin13a.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 15:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear AfC participant,

1. Msgj and Tnxman307 are organising the AfC challenge! It's a little competition to help improve some of the articles created through AfC and we are hoping that everyone will get involved. For level 1, you just need to bring a stub up to Start-class. Level 2 is improving a Start-class article to C-class. And so on. To get involved or for more information please see the competition page.
2. Those of you who haven't reviewed an article recently might not have noticed the new process that was implemented this year. Reviewing articles is now more enjoyable than ever :) You might like to give it a try. All articles waiting for review are in Category:Pending Afc requests. (Please read the updated instructions.)
3. Please consider adding {{AFC status}} to your userpage to keep track of the number of articles waiting for review. At the time of writing we are officially backlogged, so help is needed!
4. There is currently a proposal to bring the Images for upload process under the umbrella of WikiProject Articles for creation. The rationale is that both processes are designed to allow unregistered users to take part more fully in Wikipedia, and partipants in each process can probably help each other.

If you no longer wish to receive messages from WikiProject Articles for creation, please remove your name from this list. Thank you.

The page Donum Vitae was restored after your speedy deletion proposal since it forms the current backbone of Roman Catholic doctrine on bioethics. It also attracted a considerable amount of media attention when it was first released in 1987. ADM (talk) 02:35, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]