Archives

1

Hi, do you know whether there is Survivor Live this season? 108.162.157.141 (talk) 04:29, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No clue. - Katanin (talk) 13:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, why do you think line breaks are necessary? I don't think there's any problem with the reward column being stretched. It would be nice to have every column perfectly symmetrical and whatnot, but making line breaks all over the place just to keep it a similar size as the immunity column seems just a matter of having it look good. Gloss 21:59, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It has less to do with making it symmetrical and more of keeping it compact and easily readable. Stretching out the reward section makes it harder to read (at least for me) because there's now all that dead space in the pre-merge section, smack dab in the middle of the table. Plus, I figured it's along the same principle of why we put "1st voted out" and "Day 3" on different lines, because it's like a little list of titles (or, in this case, people who went on the reward), and the discrete breaks allow for at least some distinction of separation. - Katanin (talk) 15:30, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it hurts to leave a page on Survivor 32 open. We have sources to confirm where it took place and unlike the Cambodia/Second Chance, the 32nd season taped already. VegasCasinoKid (talk) 07:18, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@VegasCasinoKid: But beyond the fact that it has already filmed in Cambodia and is the 32nd season of Survivor, we don't have any information on it from a reliable source; what's the point in keeping a page up for months when we know there's nothing we can add to it, beyond being a magnet for unsourced edits? It isn't worth the hassle, and right now there's nothing we can say about it that isn't already on the series page - Katanin (talk) 13:58, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can I help with the big brother 17 wiki page? I'm a hard worker and won't mess things up Bsems (talk) 04:24, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bsems: Anyone can help! I'm by no means an authority on the pages, just a big BB fan. Looking forward to seeing your contributions! - Katanin (talk) 04:35, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well right now it won't let me edit because it is locked. How would I undo that? Bsems (talk) 04:38, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bsems: Due to vandalism, it can only be edited by autoconfirmed users until July 1; "most English Wikipedia user accounts that are more than four days old and have made at least 10 edits are considered autoconfirmed." - Katanin (talk) 04:55, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you change the verbs in the Twin Twist section to past tense? The MoS says to use present tense unless it's about an event that really is a past event. --A guy saved by Jesus (talk) 02:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@A guy saved by Jesus: My bad, sorry! - Katanin (talk) 02:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay. Just wanted to make you aware of it. --A guy saved by Jesus (talk) 02:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Big Brother 17 (U.S.) episodes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Big Brother. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Big Brother 17 (U.S.) episodes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Big Brother 16. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please not update the information on the page until after its aired. The information was updated 4 hours before the show aired and Veto completion won't be until Wednesday and somehow you already have who has won. It ruins the show for people who don't have Big Brother After Dark. Eram0801 (talk) 01:00, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Eram0801:The pages are updated to reflect the live feeds. This has always been the case. Because of the live feeds, something happening in the game immediately becomes public information, and thus is fair game for Wikipedia. Please see WP:SPOILER. Thanks! - Katanin (talk) 02:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is IAmNothing712, bureaucrat of Survivor Wiki. We would like to ask for some help in our website, such as adding blurbs and all. Please send me message regardless. Your help will be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Iankevinsevilla (talk) 02:41, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, it seems the page has been seeing an increase in IP vandalism lately. I have requested semi-protection at Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Survivor:_Cambodia. I was wondering if you could please chime in. It appears the admins have been ignoring the request as younger requests have seen responses and this one has not. If more people come in support, it may finally elicit an admin response. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 01:19, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you are being message because you made/reinstated edits pertaining to the quit of Terry Deitz from Survivor: Cambodia. These edits are being discussed on the talk page, and it appears I am the only one defending them. Two users are currently arguing that these edits are invalid. I ask that you please chime in the talk page. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 04:23, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Survivor: Honduras (Israel) page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). ( | )

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can . Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The example you are providing is irrelevant because the two situations are not the same. In season 2 of Big Brother US, the votes were nullified. In Canada's version, Jordan was removed from the jury. His vote was never nullified and Arisa made this known after it had occurred. It's not the same and this was discussed nearly a year ago. People then decided to leave it as it was. Please stop reverting it, thanks. CloudKade11 (talk) 22:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@CloudKade11: I fail to see a distinction beyond the language used. In BBUS season 2, two of the evicted HouseGuests voted for a winner; after doing so, a twist resulted in their votes not counting. What's the difference with BBCan 3? - Katanin (talk) 22:26, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Because their votes were nullified. Jordan's was not. Evicted and nullified doesn't mean the same thing. CloudKade11 (talk) 22:46, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@CloudKade11: The result of him being evicted from jury was that his jury vote was nullified. It was cast but it was no longer counted. - Katanin (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the case, why revert it? The template already had his vote with a strikethrough. The red background is to show he was evicted from the jury. It's misinforming because the current revision shows his vote was only nullified when that's obviously not the case. Again, this explanation was given when this issue resolved nearly a year ago. Personally, I suggested his vote not even be shown on the template, however, others agreed to have his vote with a strikethrough and a red background. You're making an issue of something that already reached a consensus. CloudKade11 (talk) 04:28, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Katanin:, thanks for your edit summary comments on your undo of my edit. I'm sorry if some of my phrasing was awkward, but I feel it's important to get the facts correct first and then work on phrasing. I'd like to go over them one by one and explain why I thought improvements could be made.

• episode 12 immunity challenge: The castaways pulled a rope. Pulling implies the rope is being held taut (as you said in your edit summary) but I don't believe this was the case in the challenge. As the contestants distanced themselves from the balancing table, they increasingly let out slack in the rope, and you can see the rope taking on a visible arc. This is a matter of physics: as there was a greater length of rope between the balancing station and the contestant, there was more weight from that rope, and that added weight increased the tension along the rope. Putting slack on the rope compensated for this weight-added tension (compare to a "tight rope" which has a great deal of tension). That's what made the challenge so difficult, having to constantly adapt the slack on the rope for consistent tension while moving. So I feel it could use some improvement on "pulled". "Held" and "used" aren't much better, but at least they don't have the implication that the rope is being held taut.
• episode 12 immunity challenge results: Cydney edged out Jason to win. To me, this is overly simplistic and sounds like the challenge was a struggle between Cydney and Jason which I feel misrepresents what happened. (Besides, didn't Jason's stack fall, which would place him in dead last at the time that Cydney won?) I feel the challenge was more like the tortoise and the hare (or the tortoise and 5 hares) with Cydney making an unhurried but flawless performance to win after everyone else's stack fell at least once. That's what I would like to see, however it might be phrased. More than one contestant "nearly won" this challenge and I don't know why Jason should be singled-out for mention except that he was voted off that week.
• episode 14 immunity challenge results: Michele came from behind and edged past Tai to win the challenge. I feel this is notable because Tai was so close - perhaps 3 pieces left of an approximate 54-piece puzzle (6 columns x 3 pieces x 3 layers) - when Michele won. Also, I don't understand why you think this was awkward enough to delete while at the same time reverting another phrase to Cydney edged out Jason. I suppose "Michele came from behind to win the challenge, narrowly beating Tai." would be better.
• episode 14 bonus reward challenge: to stack balls and discs on stands. I believe if you look at stills from the episode you can see there is something coloured between the white balls. Stacking balls on top of one another is pretty much impossible. They not only were stacking balls but also some sort of disc or ring which was also placed using the fork, and allowed stability to stack the following ball. (This was the unused option of the first challenge of the season.) You deleted this as trivia. However, the previous season of Survivor noted the reuse or adaptation of many challenges. Why is that OK there but not here?

Hopefully I've explained myself, and I'd appreciate your thoughts. Reidgreg (talk) 19:20, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message. @ReidGreg:! Fair point on those first three. I really like your "Michele came from behind to win the challenge, narrowly beating Tai." suggestion, in particular. I made edits to reflect your proposed changes.

The Ep 14 reward challenge description currently reads "to stack balls and stands," with the "stands" being those "something coloured between the white balls." Not quite sure what the proposed change would do differently. Additionally, current practice is to only denote repeated challenges in full returning players seasons, where reusing challenges is deliberate to accentuate the season's status as a returning player season. But by opening the floodgates to all seasons, it can then lead to debates as to which challenges are from previous seasons, or which elements denote inclusion. If we could make it clear in a way that it's different (and not precedent changing), I'd be into it, but since it wasn't a factor in the challenge (since no one took the offer at the start of the season) it just seems too trivial. - Katanin (talk) 21:11, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Agree with "stands". (I'm honestly not sure what to call them, but stacking balls just wasn't accurate.) With repeated challenges I understand it could get out of hand but in this case it was from the same season, and it neatly bookended the series by taking an unused part of the first challenge for the last challenge. (Also it suggested difficulty since tribes avoided that option the first time.) I may take another look at "Cydney won the challenge."

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Survivor 10: The Caribbean, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shittim. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:33, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do not add in unverified votes, that's why there are question marks in the table as they didn't show the votes at the end of episode 5.

https://namu.wiki/w/소사이어티%20게임 Petchnatawat (talk) 18:07, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Petchnatawat: That's cool that that's how that Wiki organizes it, but I think that splitting the table into three is more confusing, especially because there's no info that isn't already transmitted in the current, consolidated table. Just because another organization does something differently doesn't mean that we have to here; we even have a policy like that regarding within Wikipedia itself (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). What issues do you have with the way we currently organize the table? – Katanin (talk) 18:13, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you help me edit the article Survivor: Ghost Island? IP users keep adding various information about the cast, tribe name, tribe desginations before CBS has even issued a press release which is precedent. VietPride10 (talk) 05:01, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Rengering meets every guideline for having his OWN article on Wikipedia, let alone a mention in the section for notable contestants. He has been released by many independent news agencies as appearing on the show, as well as being a celebrity outside of that. This isn't a "typical" notability situation, and your reasoning does not apply here.2600:8807:C0C0:6C40:68CD:C591:BC5F:871 (talk) 05:55, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@2600:8807:C0C0:6C40:68CD:C591:BC5F:871: I don't quite understand what you're getting at. Would you mind elaborating a little more? I fail to see why his acting/modeling can be seen as notable. I know he's received a bit of coverage for his work as a police officer, but it all seems fairly minor. What makes this any different from other castaways who have received minor coverage that has been considered not notable for inclusion? - Katanin (talk) 14:34, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe you've done any research at all, but I am happy to help. I am intentionally leaving the plethora of National and International press coverage regarding Survivor out of this list. In addition to appearing on the covers of more than 250 books, including many international best-sellers, he was recently a featured speaker at the 91st Annual Rudolph Valentino Memorial in Los Angeles, joining The Oscar's Brandee Cox, famed film historial Marc Wannamaker, and Academy Award Nominated Actress, Terry Moore.

https://www.facebook.com/DNAmagazine/posts/10156894026924274?__xts__[0]=68.ARCPKjevNXU3oP6-CQcXSRxFbx8CFL73OQ1tnIX8agqePJGxeGs78R8e2iI9NlohVV05KyZQ8yVRTUdZhrMFIoa13KWECVuoxxlvTs_wfCJaJc8lkaZ2AdYM3d83PqtxKfEHrMQaoDbRaMVGjD-tNZx-VG8qjKhoHsS-F-x5S4CT1qKn6Rw8&__tn__=C-R Featured on the cover of DNA Magazine's "SEXIEST MEN ALIVE" issue... (International press)

http://popwrapped.com/gainesville-hot-cop-daniel-rengering-named-cjc-photography-s-most-viewed-model-of-2017 Named CJC Photography (Top 5 International Book Cover Photographer) Model Of The Year 2017

http://instinctmagazine.com/post/instinct-exclusive-interview-daniel-rengering Cover interview with one of the world's top LGBT Magazines

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5406179/Hot-cop-Hurricane-Irma-selfie-calendar-sale.html International press regarding his "Hot Cop" charity calendar, which raised more than $50,000

https://www.insideedition.com/headlines/25488-hot-cops-who-went-viral-over-selfie-will-pose-for-calendar-to-raise-money-for Additional charity calendar coverage

http://www.kylemcmahon.me/daniel-rengering-hot-cop-interview-fitness/ Interview discussing him hosting on the red carpet of The GRAMMY's

http://www.wcjb.com/content/news/Hot-Cop-to-work-Grammys-red-carpet-480076133.html ABC Network News coverage of Daniel hosting at the GRAMMY's

http://gainesvillescene.com/hot-cop-grammys-host/

News piece discussing his working on the red carpets of The GRAMMY's, The Oscars and The SAG Awards

http://www.tmz.com/photos/2018/03/23/daniel-rengering-hot-shots/ Daniel featured on TMZ's famous "Hot Shots" celebrity gallery

http://www.cjc-photography.com/2018/06/model-spotlight-daniel-rengering/ Interview with Daniel, discussing him hosting on multiple red carpets for Hollywood events

https://popwrapped.com/daniel-rengering-joins-hollywood-film-elite-as-guest-speaker-at-91st-annual-rudolph-valentino-memorial News piece/interview regarding speaking at the Valentino Memorial

Notable, general press, discussing accomplishments, fitness modeling, acting, the original viral photo, etc:

https://heavy.com/news/2018/03/daniel-rengering-hot-cop-girlfriend-survivor-photos-instagram/ https://www.today.com/news/hot-cops-hurricane-irma-go-viral-promise-calendar-t116267 http://time.com/4939672/gainesville-police-officers-hot/ https://www.ajc.com/news/national/cop-viral-photo-has-new-additional-career-romance-novel-cover-model/8n8OOArdtflu3e37h01yBM/ http://www.nbc15.com/content/news/Police-officers-go-viral-in-Irma-aftermath-444435503.html http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170913/florida-police-officers-go-viral-with-good-looks http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/weird/ct-hot-florida-cops-viral-facebook-photo-20170913-story.html https://people.com/human-interest/florida-police-department-cop-viral-photos/ http://americanupbeat.com/viral-handsome-cop-becomes-model-with-possible-tv-role/ https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/16/us/irma-chainsaw-nun-hot-cops.html

2600:8807:C0C0:6C40:68CD:C591:BC5F:871 (talk) 18:04, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@2600:8807:C0C0:6C40:68CD:C591:BC5F:871: Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE, not everything in the world is worthy of inclusion on the Wiki. He doesn't have his own page, nor does he have any prior mention on the Wiki, which breaks with precedent from the section that is there to explain any prior major notability from the contestants. - Katanin (talk) 18:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Having a guest-starring role on the Netflix series Stranger Things, hosting The GRAMMY's, Emmy's, and SAG Awards, as well as winning major international modeling awards, and having hundreds of independent press pieces in regards to his accomplishments makes him notable, per Wiki standards. Just because he doesn't have an article, doesn't mean he wouldn't qualify for one, or meet notability standards. WP:INDISCRIMINATE is not applicable here, and at this point, your edits are not only arrogant, but severely lacking in good-faith. 2600:8807:C0C0:6C40:68CD:C591:BC5F:871 (talk) 20:34, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@2600:8807:C0C0:6C40:68CD:C591:BC5F:871: I see no reliable source on the Stranger Things or Emmy Awards front. Again, I'm not saying that he's not accomplished, merely that we don't list every castaway who has received any bit of non-Survivor press in the pre-contestants table paragraph. For Survivor: Worlds Apart, for example, the consensus stands that Will Sims II, who was similarly a viral video star, did not merit inclusion in the pre-table paragraph. Also, please no personal attacks and assume good faith. - Katanin (talk) 22:29, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop willfully ignoring the dozens of notable links that were posted above. Just because his career began with a viral photo, does not negate the awards won, and the laundry list of other accomplishments listed above. GRAMMY's, Oscars, SAG Awards, as well as the dozens of other accomplishments are there. I spent very little time digging those up. The list would be colossally longer, if any significant amount of time was spent doing more. I'll be happy to spend more time unnecessarily sourcing all of those items into the tidbit if necessary? Let me know if you feel that is needed. I believe we have a disconnect in regards to the definition of "minor coverage." If you believe that he should have an article, independent, I would assume you'd have no problem helping me create such an article, as it seems to be warranted? I'm also happy to speak with other editors if you feel they can provide additional insight, as we have seemingly come to an impasse in regards to this topic. Thanks! 2600:8807:C0C0:6C40:8CD0:8CDB:7477:D97B (talk) 22:43, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@2600:8807:C0C0:6C40:68CD:C591:BC5F:871:I agree that we are at an impasse. Per WP:NN, I do not believe that he should have an article, though I respect your right to start one. If you would like to speak with other editors or contact arbitration, I support that decision too. Additionally, I'd like to remind you that not all the links you posted are from reliable sources, including those that are self-published or published by those with a direct connection to Rengering, including PopWrapped, which is owned by his manager. Additionally, I must also confirm that your edits do not violate WP:COI, given your vested interest in Rengering, intimate knowledge including unreleased information and lack of prior edits. - Katanin (talk) 01:04, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I understand some of your concern. Lack of prior edits is irrelevant here. You have to start somewhere on Wikipedia. This just happened to be my starting point. Assuming I have a vested interest in Rengering is not assuming good faith. My interest is not vested. Nothing has been self-published, and I do now see that PopWrapped is owned by his management company, however, that was one link of many, of which other presented sources have reported the same information. The information presented is not a COI, as it is not subjective, but factual. Regardless of your suspicions, and even if someone was close to Rengering, the information presented would not change, nor would the significance contained within the information. I am in agreeance that independent sources are needed, which is why they are presented here in bulk, and would also point out that the subject himself is often a source of relevant information as well. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but if Rengering states in a press interview that he is the oldest of 3 children, I wouldn't need to speak to his mother or see their birth certificates to include this in an article.2600:8807:C0C0:6C40:8CD0:8CDB:7477:D97B (talk) 02:19, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the unaired reward challenge being removed? I'm pretty sure a contestant (Wardog) is a reliable source. VietPride10 (talk) 15:44, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@VietPride10: Per WP:INTERVIEW, "Interviews are generally reliable for the fact that the interviewee said something, but not necessarily for the accuracy of what was said. The publications are merely repeating their comments, typically with minimal editing. No matter how highly respected a publication is, it does not present interviewee responses as having been checked for accuracy. In this sense, interviews should be treated like self-published material." - Katanin (talk) 16:08, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you have done with Survivor: David vs. Goliath. Continuing to do so may result in blocking of editing privileges. Thank you. 173.79.201.217 (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• @173.79.201.217: Hello! Please remember to assume good faith and avoid threatening users. It appears that an arbitrary distinction has been made between quits (as you said in your edit summary, between "people who quit because they whine and moan about it being too hard" and "those who have a legitimate injury or illness"). How would you classify quits like Osten Taylor from Survivor: Pearl Islands, who quit due to physical strain on his body, or Kathy Sleckman from Survivor: Micronesia, who quit due to mental illness? Due to the precariousness of such distinctions, I believe we should avoid them entirely. Choosing to validate some quits with qualifiers and not others is not impartial. Also, per your comment in said edit summary that "It hadn't been messed with before, so why now?," consensus can change. - Katanin (talk) 13:32, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Survivor31Logo.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

replaced by File:Survivor cambodia second chance season thirty-one region 1 dvd.png as lead image of Survivor: Cambodia...

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Survivor31Logo.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:14, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]