Hello, welcome to Wikipedia.

You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)

Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.

Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.

You might find these links helpful in creating new pages or helping with the above tasks: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

• If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.

• You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.

• If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

• Before saving a page, it's a good idea to use the Show Preview button to review your edits.

Again, welcome! - UtherSRG 16:45, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for catching the graphical problem. Somehow, when I first uploaded the files, the file names for First and Second Lieutenant became switched. I redownloaded, renamed and reuploaded the files accordingly and the problem should be fixed now. Thanks! RadicalBender 04:59, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hey Dainamo, have asked on a couple of newsgroups for any info on origin of RAF blue. Will let you know if I have any joy. Cheers Moriori 02:23, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)

The original RAF uniforms were based on cavalry uniforms for the reason that the RAF evolved out of reconnaissance units, flying balloons to examine the German trenches during the Great War. (hence the "second is the first")Presumably though the colour represents the sky. Duncharris 17:27, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I note that you have amended various rank titles to smaller case and I wanted to seriously question whether or not this was correct in the given context. Example: Group Captain becomes group captain. Whilst this is correct in most uses, surely, if we are talking about a proper noun such as in a title or phrase such as "the rank of Group Captain" or "Group Captain Mark Smith" then capitals should be used. Additionally military protocol seems to back this up (the rank is abbreviated (GpCapt, not Gpcapt.) Dainamo 11:44, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

When a rank is used before a person's name, it has to be capitalized: Group Captain Mark Smith. Or when the rank is used to refer to a specific person, it can be capitalized: "Report it to the Group Captain." Because this is the way people most often see ranks used, they tend to overgeneralize this rule and overcapitalize. Ranks do not have capitals when not used as a replacement for a specific person's name. *"Mark Smith was a Group Captain." is wrong: it should be "Mark Smith was a group captain."

Because ranks can be used without capitals, Wikipedia articles about ranks should not have capitals in the article titles.

Capitals in abbreviations don't always tell you how the spelled-out phrase should be capitalized. For example, the symbol for megapascal is MPa.

--Indefatigable 14:56, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hi. I've looked at [1] : I can instead find a copyright notice at the bottom. Can you please clarify as to where you found the public domain declaration for this image? Thanks. Morwen 09:57, May 15, 2004 (UTC)

I must admit I didn't give the positioning of the flag very much thought. I loaded the InfoxBox as part of the Ceremonial counties of England series, which lead on the locator map because it is the only thing they all have (and a good thing to start with for those unfamiliar with English Geography). The coats of arms, where available, seemed to logically belong with the council information. Since I found the IoW flag displayed alongside the coat of arms, I moved them en bloc. I realise this is inconsistent with the only other county flags, Cornwall and Devon, which are displayed in the body text - but in those cases the flag is actually discussed in the article. And certainly in Cornwall's case the flag is in use beyond council buildings. You seem to have admitted yourself that this is not the case for the Island. I am content with what I have done - but I won't reverse any change of prominence you might care to make. --Keith Edkins 15:33, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for your vote on VfD. But please sign and date (four tildes, see above) all posts to VfD. It doesn't really matter with this one, the majority say keep anyway, but if your vote was the decider it means the sysop who eventually deals with it needs to check the page history, and we get busy enough as is! On the other hand if you sign it we can assume that others have had the opportunity to check your bona fides, and it all runs relatively smoothly. Thanks again for your contribution. Andrewa 07:24, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

To avoid an editing circle of well meaning, but incorrect changes and then necessary correcting that is being made on a few particular pages (due to a commonly held misunderstanding) I would like to enter an explanation text that appears in editing but does not appear on the page. How do I do this? Dainamo 23:34, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• You can enclose the text inside of HTML comment delimiters, like this: <!-- comment here -->. It might also be a good idea to put your comment on the article's talk page as well. -- Wapcaplet 23:58, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Or even better, explain the misunderstanding in the text of the article, so no one is tempted to "fix" it. Nohat 07:08, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

This method sometimes works, but other times it really fails. An article can lose its coherence when it is peppered with subclauses and get-outs aimed at satisfying the varying demands of writers, rather than readers. Depending on circumstances: it is often best stick to the talk page, and an HTML comment as a back up for particularly crucial items. Pcb21| Pete 07:30, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi Dainamo. I moved this from the village pump in case you hadn't seen it yet. Angela. 18:36, Jul 30, 2004 (UTC)

I replied to your question at my talk page. -- Jao 10:42, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Tnx for ACK. Sometimes my detail orientation is too much for someone; sometimes it works. [smile] --Jerzy(t) 03:24, 2004 Aug 9 (UTC)

I've added a response to your message on "decimate," "haitch" etc. Please correct me if I've misremembered the usage of "haitch." I've certainly heard differing pronunciations from Oz and NZ firsthand, with both informants making a point of the distinction. The use as a shibboleth in Ireland is anecdotal. -dmh

Great work on ISAs, you really fleshed it out. I've corrected some typos and rearranged slightly. I'm also pretty sure minors aren't allowed to hold ISAs. Do you think the last section really belongs in the article? (tracker funds vs managed funds). It's good stuff, but might be better in a different article, as the issue is not only confined to ISAs. Matthewmayer 21:58, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

When selecting an immage on the web to "save as" ususally it can only be saved in the same format itv appears e.g. "JPEG". By printing to paperport in can be converted to another format, but in the absense of paperport how can it be intructed to be saved in another format? Dainamo 16:26, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You can convert image formats easily using Photoshop or GIMP. →Raul654 17:08, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)

Those two programs are excellent image editing programs. I especially recommend the GIMP, which is free and open-source. A Windows version is available here.

If you're looking for a lightweight, fast Windows program to quickly convert (not edit) images, I highly recommend IrfanView, which is also free. • Benc • 20:37, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hi Dainamo. It was time to clean the village pump, so I've moved your question here in case you hadn't seen it yet. Angela. 14:34, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

Hi Dainamo, I've responded at Talk:Curry to your question. Ambarish | Talk 18:00, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hey - I'd noticed your edit, and its cool; my comments on keystages were as much as anything the beginings of an attempt to help explain the 'changes to the system' paragraph... i.e. why changes were felt needed. --NeilTarrant 15:04, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi Dainamo... I replied to your question on my talk page. :) — T-bomb 00:27, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your fine work on Isle of Wight. I'm thinking of moving on to Ventnor now (it's in dire need of work), and would appreciate your assistance should you chose to offer it! Naturenet 13:53, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi, seconded about the work on the Ventnor article. I put up much of the previous content, it's nice to see it looking more formal. I grew up there and still visit now and then, but there just ain't no broadband there. - chris Elseware

Check out Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit. I've never done it myself, but someone there should be able to help you! :) jengod 21:30, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (| talk)

Dainamo, I've been helping tag the large number of untagged images and I came across this image you uploaded: Image:CowesWeek.jpg. I am no copyright expert, but does the Isle of Wight Tourism site allow use of its images? I have tagged the image {{unverified}} for now, but could this possibly be a copyright violation? Also I see that you live *on* the Isle of Wight, maybe you have a photo of Cowes Week that you took this year and could upload that under a {{GFDL}}. Leave me a message with your thoughts, thanks! --MaxPower 18:52, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)

This also goes for Image:Cowes_from_air.jpg. --MaxPower 18:55, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

• Image:Generals_in_the_British_Army3.doc

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 {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{PD-self}} if you wish to release your own work to the public domain, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 22:55, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

also:

• Image:Warrant c2a.bmp
• Image:Warrant c2b.bmp
• Image:Warrant c1.bmp

Duk 22:29, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

No idea. I didn't write the section about the stamps.

Hi, just in case you did not see it, I left an answer for you under your comment on my Talk page rather than scattering the comments everywhere. MPLX/MH 17:52, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I posted a further reply MPLX/MH 18:35, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I began a major editing job of sorting out the BBC convoluted articles to which one person has already objected. Part of that work involved creating a lot of new sub-articles and one in particular: British Broadcasting Company. Here is my problem: I am willing to present a more detailed and accurate history but I don't want to enter into revert wars (I will walk away from the article should that happen), but with the current slow speed of Wikipedia it is also a major sacrifice in time trying to do this editing work. So, if you would like to poke your nose in and see what is going on regarding the various BBC subjects - including Talk pages - I would appreciate it since you are the one who goaded me into taking on this chore (just joking.) But seriously, I would appreciate your overall observation in case I start upsetting some pro-BBC people who have their own strong POV that they want to protect. Because Wiki works only some of the time at the moment I am having to work around its current unreliability, so it may take me time to accomplish this job. I just don't want others wading in to attack something that is a work in progress and not a finished contribution. MPLX/MH 16:10, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You will now begin to see some of your questions answered on the expanded British Broadcasting Company article. MPLX/MH 02:31, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I note you have exposed yourself as a vegan. I have some sympahies to vegetarians making the leap to excluding eggs and dairy. The former is an industry where many male chickens need to be killed and the latter relies on the production of beef. I am sure you are able to, but you need not expand on these to convince me of being a logical step for a vegetarain to make. However the area that thing confuses me is the exclusion of Honey. Bees may be cultivated without suffering or killing to produce honey. The same might be said if you had pet sheep. Surely using the wool they produce does not have to involve killing or cruelty? You may however not like the stress it might cause? I leave it for you to answer, but you wouldn't be able to apply this to the limited cognition of Bees who generally can thrive and give us honey. Dainamo

Hi Dainamo- I guess evreybodies interpretation of 'veganism' is subjective- personally i abstained from honey for some 18 years, for the somewhat dogmatic (i now admit) reason that 'its an animal product', however after speaking to some beekeepers and seeing them at work, and being convinced that their management of their hives was sensitive, I don't see a problem with using small scale, garden produced honey, particularly if it's production is part of a sustainable orchard management system. So I'll buy the odd jar of honey in such circustances, maybe 2 or 3 jars a year? Howver I still wouldn't buy Gales or whatever honey from a supermarket.

Same answers could well apply to wool, and indeed eggs if produced from a smallholding, backyard chickens or whatever. personally I would still to abstain from such animal products, but my main problem is with the industrialisation of animal pharming, I just can't reconcile the cruelty, misery and ecological devastation caused by mass scale animal pharming.

Please note that I have expressed these views to some other vegans (usually online) who strongly disagree with me, in fact I was once told that I have 'no right' to describe myself as vegan, personally I couldn't care less, it's just a word, a convenient descriptor, if it ceases to be a useful term for me I won't use it anymore! Hope this helps, but it's only my personal 'take' on the matter! Cheers quercus robur 17:29, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

See my response on the talk page. DmitryKo 10:13, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Did you deliberately change "Marshal of the RAF/other Commonwealth air force" to "Marshal of the RAF"? There was also (at least) a separate Marshal of the RAAF at the time (King George VI). Please see the discussion of this at Talk:Comparative_military_ranks_of_World_War_II#A_proposal. Grant65 | Talk 16:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I Like your user page ! Well done Brookie:the wind in the grass 19:22, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I like what you are doing with the NATO rank pages. However, I do feel what fits nicely on one page might not suit another, and that your replacements on British Army officer rank insignia and British Army enlisted rank insignia (which I reverted) and perhaps also the U.S. Army officer rank insignia (& Enlisted) pages, were not as aesthetically pleasing (ok that's POV) but more to the point, they were not best fitted in the page layout. They were also confusing when they said there was no officer designate or student officer equivalent. There may be no distinctive insignia in each case, but, aside from OF(D) in the U.S forces. Where they obviously exist should it not read no insignia instead?. The pages in question are or should evolve into more description including prose, than the comparative pages (excellent though these are) and can present the same stored pictures in a different way to suit the article. Incidentally, I am trying to get an image of a coductor's insignia (the highest WO1 in the Brit Army). It's bascially the same but in a wreath not unlike the WO2 Quartermaser. kind regards Dainamo 23:14, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to fix inacuracies. The british ranks as they originaly appeared occuped too much space and were hard to read. The enlisted ranks looked fine, however the officer ranks had data I could not comrihend. I think a horizontal table looks better, and is more readable. You can fix any inacuracies, my data sheet regarding Of-D and Of-S is incomplete so I have no idea. instead of No equavalent you can write No insignia, which seems to work fine.

I'll investigate the coductor's insignia further.

I am not going to revert the page, I hope you may reconsider. The reason I used the NATO template is if anyone fixes something on the template it affects multiple pages. Cat ^chi? 19:44, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Flag_oif_the_Soviet_Union.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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 its not being deleted. Thank you. —MetsBot 18:48, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Flag_oif ! 7*7*7=343

Scratch pad is Good! Rus Language one Please (I`m Serge )

Flag Sovetskogo Sojuza / And I Not understand? ( Pishite po-Russki ,Please)

Dear Dainamo, at the moment there is a poll taking place on the Macedonian Slavs talk page to which you could make a significant contribution. Thank you in advance for your participation. Ivica83 13:08, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi, just to let you know that the list of UK participants at the UK notice board was getting rather long, so I have replaced it with the above category which I have added to your user page. -- Francs2000 | 30 June 2005 19:08 (UTC)

Goodness, that's pretty shocking! Well, I just think it should be sourced in the article, so that others like me don't think it's vandalism. Thanks!:) --Zantastik talk 23:50, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you recently nominated this article for FA. However, you haven't place the template in the article's discussion page. Also, the nomination is with the nomination listing for the article Cochineal. If you cannot be able to place the article in its own nomination listing, I would be happy to do so to prevent confusion. Also, to tell you in advance, the article doesn't have a reference section or inline citations (which are necessary for FA). Pentawing 17:33, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the article into its own FAC template (which can be seen on the article's talk page). Next time, follow the directions when nominating an article for Featured Article so that any support and criticism can be lodged with the appropriate article. Pentawing 21:31, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that Image:Toilet.jpg was uploaded by your account, but the image description makes it sound like some friend of yours used your account to upload it. Maybe wanna check with your friends if so... --Colonel Cow 16:48, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the interesting note about the land in the Solent sinking to create the channel, but (not being knowledgable in this area myself) I am curious as to whether the sea levels would have also risen at the end of the ice age as would be expected, thus meaning the creation the channel was through a conbination of both phenomena? Or is the rising sea not really a major reason for the geographic feature we now know? I would be interested to find out if you know. Dainamo 09:29, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether there's any direct evidence for sea level change - but the evidence for land level being the main cause is that in Britain deeply flooded estuaries (rias) are characteristic of the south coast alone. In Scotland, you get the opposite: raised beaches. So the overall picture is that the land level has tilted, up in the north, down in the south (ie post-glacial rebound). Tearlach 12:08, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

you made Korean military ranks, then blanked it, was this an accident? I have reverted it now before it got speedy deleted. Martin - The non-blue non-moose 15:17, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed that Korean military ranks is a cut and paste move on Comparative military ranks of Korea (which I was heavily involoved in writing). Please sue the "Move Page" feature instead of cutting and pasting into new articles as this disrupts the edit history. -Husnock 16:34, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In your EB correction on Henry VIII and Leviticus, does POV mean "Point of View?"

Would it be more clear to say: "The inclusion or exclusion of a brother's widow in any interpretation depends on your point of view," or am I changing your meaning?

Thanks. --Rossburnett 16:50, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dai.

The main reason: it has been part of the mandatory schooling curriculum since a long long time (Argentine never relented its claim). You are taught that the islands ARE Argentine, and were taken by force by the Evil Empire.

The second reason: it was the only war Argentina took part in the 20th century (letting aside the declaration of war to the Axis in the very last minutes of IIWW and the participation in UN Blue Helmets). I was too young to be drafted, but I knew people who died there from my own town and met several veterans afterwards.

Sooner or later I'll write Falklands War#Cultural impact in Argentina.

So I think it's quite simple. What I really don't get is why would anybody else care! (but the islanders, ça va de sois).

Regards, User:Ejrrjs says What? 07:24, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's worth the trouble to clarify "largest in terms of what". See if my small edit satisfies. PS: Only third biggest? Is Fine Gael or the DUP in the number two slot? QuartierLatin1968 13:46, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hello! - thanks for your note on my talk page, i added what i consider to be a pretty reliable source to the page, so hope you agree. If you think about it, 'She's got a ticket to ride' just had to be a pun back in the day when a 'ticket to ryde' was such a part of english tourism / culture. Anyhoo - happy editing! Petesmiles 14:16, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it posible for you to find me any image for the "Officer Cadet" rank so I can create one following the patern of existing insignias. Thanks. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 00:59, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you have uploaded Image:CowesWeek.jpg. You have marked that the copyright owner has released the image to the public domain. Can you confirm that this image is in the public domain? Thanks. Isopropyl 02:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roedd dy ddisgrifiad o "eich tin" yn rhy ddoniol i mi allu ei ddileu :-) Ond mae'n gamarweiniol braidd ... e.e. gweler

http://www.google.com/search?q=eich-tin+welsh

Banquets my arse ... how about glossing like in my first sentence? Couldn't bring myself to delete it outright ... 80.234.144.28 13:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you come back here, please translate the Welsh above. I don't speak the language. I only was able to get the above word play after I heard a Welsh friend referring to Torville and Dean as "Torville and Arse" and then less than a day after someone (obviously neither familiar with German nor history) asking what the Welsh [sic] phrase "ike dean" meant. Referring back to my welsh friend The most similar word to ich I could find in welsh was "eich". Dainamo 14:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't the one that left the comment...and my Welsh is such that I had to look up a word or two, but the gist is:

"Your description of eich tin is too humorous for me to delete. But it is somewhat misleading...see http://www.google.com/search?q=eich-tin+welsh"

For what it is worth, this has started to make the rounds (I'm guilty of sending it to a mailing list). I can't stop laughing. -- Straif 20:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Geroge.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:08, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Cleaned THAT bit of the article up, I'm afraid, though perhaps you might try getting it into WP:BJAODN. When all's said and done we're an encyclopaedia and that comes before jokes. Even quite funny ones like this. ;-) 86.143.51.168 22:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:FieldMarshal.png. 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 11:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nicke L 11:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for sorting this out!/Nicke L 13:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for your message. I am afraid I still see no reference on the rank comparison page to a source that offers any evidence for the equivalents you propose. Your equivalents are also still in contradiction of the official comparisons. If you have a source, please put it in straight away. i.e. Name of book, author, publisher, and page (ideally also date and place of publication). You can check up about this on Wikipedia:References. Mesoso 23:12, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that neither cross-referencing of wikipedia articles nor a website talkpage are acceptable as sources for wikipedia. If you look at wikipedia:Attribution and above all Wikipedia:Attribution/FAQ#What kinds of sources are generally regarded as unreliable? you will see that neither source is acceptable. (Both are considered "self-published" and therefore useless as a source). Wikipedia:Attribution/FAQ makes clear what sources are acceptable. I must therefore reject your rank comparison as unsourced in accordance with Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. It is one of the six key policies that you need a reliable source.

I will of course be happy to accept your version when you find a reliable source, acceptable to wikipedia's policy of wikipedia:attribution.

Mesoso 17:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Admiral RN - new.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:49, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:RYSpic.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.

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 fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 01:36, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:RYSpic.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-no-disclaimers}} 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 01:36, 18 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 01:36, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:RYSpic.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:23, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:RYSpic.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

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.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 05:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Brig.bmp, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 16:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated Image:Lieu_gen.bmp, Image:Col.bmp, Image:Lieu_col.bmp, Image:Gen.bmp, Image:Major.bmp, Image:Capt.bmp, Image:Lieu.bmp, Image:Warrant_c1.bmp, Image:Sergeant.bmp, Image:Corporal.bmp and Image:Lance_cor.bmp. --Sherool (talk) 16:30, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear the reason I listed these for deletion was that they are not used, and they are in BMP format wich can't actualy be used in articles. As for the military insignia issue there is aparently some question about wheter or not the international laws in question actualy have any effect on copyright, not sure about the details, might want to check Template talk:Military-Insignia. As for Image:UK-Army-OF5.gif, that image is hosted on Commons, not here, so we might not have the exact same template here. --Sherool (talk) 11:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Would I be correct in assuming that you created the currently used images of RN shoulder boards? Cheers, --Harlsbottom 11:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is very old, everything started in the 1600s when the british empire first attemped to take over River Plate. They failed and left us alone for two centuries. In 1806 they invaded Buenos Aires, that become part of the empire for 2 months, and had to leave the area because the creole population of Uruguay had organized an army and defeated them. One year later they returned with ten times more soldiers (15.000). Unfortunately for them we had been preparing the defence against their possible return and they did not manage to take the city. As of 2007 the Scottish 71th regiment's flag is at Virgin Mary's feets in Santo Domingo church. In this context the british could not tollerate to have been defeated twice by a spanish colony, so they invaded the Malvinas Islands, repatriated the inhabitants and brought their own settlers. Compare it with the Palestinese-Israeli problem in Jerusalem if you like. We want our lands back, the empire wants a strategic base for their airplanes and missiles. That is why most argeninians dislike the british. Tell me if you want a better explanation of the conflict's history. --Argentini an 22:58, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Albeit this discusion has a month and I wasn't asked to participate on it, I must say that Argentini an opinions are a "little" blinded by extreme patriotism. Most argentinians DON'T dislike the british, and I think this user in more than one ocassion has referred to the british people in a disturbing manner (I pointed that on his talk page with a diff). I think I can give my opinion as I'm from Argentina too, albeit not as ultra-nacionalism as some people are (fortunately not too much people are worried only in take off the isles form the british... I wonder what they'll do with the islanders if the Malvinas pass to a Argetinian administration? Go figure.) Grettings. --Bolt 20:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, British and United States military ranks compared, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British and United States military ranks compared. Thank you. Caerwine Caer’s whines 22:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:IW Arms.png. 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) 20:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I know you've done a lot of work on Isle of Wight articles, and thought you'd be interested to know that I've just started Wikipedia:WikiProject Wight. I think there's a lot more that can be done with the island's articles, and this should help us all to work together consistently. I hope to see you there! --Peeky44 (talk) 11:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:CowesWeek.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. Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:36, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your message from a year ago at Talk: Flag of the Isle of Wight regarding the shade of blue. I created the orignal image a few years ago and would love to get it right. As I recall, my source materials varied greatly, from a deep navy blue to blues even lighter than the one I wound up using. If you have any photographs of the flag or other reliable resources I'd be glad to make the change ASAP. Dyfsunctional (talk) 17:12, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dainamo! An article you have been concerned with has many issues and urgently needs improving. If you can help with these issues please see Talk:Victorian architecture, address the different points if you can, and leave any comments there.--Kudpung (talk) 01:22, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Ryde School with Upper Chine, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.  rdunnalbatross  09:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I didn't like that edit, but couldn't think of a way to address it.
Your solution is simple, effective, unambiguous, and with the benefit of hindsight, obvious. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:PD-insignia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 05:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:IW Arms.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:16, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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) 22:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article Caulking (video games) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no assertion of notability, or why this is relevant for a general encyclopedia.

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. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 21:07, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]