User talk:Gump Stump

Welcome!

Hello, Gump Stump, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! karmafist 20:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Franklin

Would you provide a source for your claims about Franklin's last expedition, please? What you're claiming is contrary to everything I can find, including the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography and the Canadian equivalent. --ajn (talk) 22:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shangri-La (Vancouver)

Nice work on the merge. Thanks. -- Usgnus 18:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian Shield

I noticed you made a good edit to Canadian Shield Do you have a source where you are getting your info? The article needs some sources so if you have them it would be much appreciated if you could add them.-Ravedave 06:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alton Brown

Thanks for your edit to Alton Brown. You may want to keep your eye on the brief discussion at Talk:Alton_Brown, where it appears we're building consensus to keep the Cubetoons paragraph off the page. I expect the originator to put it back any time now. Travisl 15:20, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Franklin

The three sailors buried at Beechey Island were autopside in 1985-96 by Dr Owen Beattie, with tuberculosis as the most proximate cause of death; toxicological reports also showed eleveated levels of lead. Further examination showed that one, and only one of the bodies had previously been autopsied, presumably by the ships' surgeons in 1845-46, but the results of that autopsy are utterly unknown, since the surgeons and the ships and almost all written records were lost with the expedition.

Untagged image

An image you uploaded, Image:Delta Chi Coat of Arms.JPG, was tagged with the {{coatofarms}} copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as {{seal}}. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 11:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Hungarian Passport

Hello, I saw you edited again the hungarian passport page. Its OK, the H&P citation may go, but what it says now is that Hungarian citizens can go to 101 countries without visa, and that is not true. It was calculated by H&P in 2006 that hungarians could visit 101 countries without a visa, since then, at least 4 countries have given visa free status to hungarian citizens, so the fact that it has 101 is misleading and not true. Besides, the 101 countries or territories mentioned in the study are from H&P criteria, so not noticing the name of the source is also misleading. Then I would recommend, look for an ACTUAL source of how many countries can hungarian citizens go to, or state an aproximation of 105 or so countries. Thank you again and Ill wait ur response.--Philip200291 (talk) 22:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it i dont know if you like it, check it please. --Philip200291 (talk) 22:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Subaru.svg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Subaru.svg. 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) 05:28, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beechey Island Images

Thanks for your message about the Beechey Island images. I am indeed the same person behind all these images -- most of my Wikipedia accounts are unified under Clevelander96, but on the Commons I use Arctihistorian01, and in "real life" I am Dr. Russell A. Potter. If you know of a way to unify that account with my others, I would be grateful! It would clear up these sorts of things. Clevelander96 (talk) 02:56, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a brief note to let you know that I was able to obtain a name change on the Commons, so that all my accounts are now unified under Clevelander96. The older images are still tagged with "Arctichistorian01" but that now redirects to me. Hope this now clears up any issues over the Beechey Island images, and I hope to upload more Arctic images soon; let me know if there's anything you're looking for. Thanks, Clevelander96 (talk) 16:36, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hemlock Valley Ski Area -> Hemlock Valley Resort

You did this move incorrectly; you should have used the "move" tab at the top of the page, which would have also moved the talkpage as well as the edit history; now the edit history is in the redirect page, which shouldn't be the case; I can't move it back now, to re-do the move, because you've created the new target-article....I'm not an admin. Be advised that you'll see some switches/deletes as whichever admin takes this on sorts it out. I won't bother creating the talkpage with their WP templates, i.e. on your new page, as they'll be moved over by the admin when this is resolved.Skookum1 (talk) _Hemlock_Valley_Resort" class="ext-discussiontools-init-timestamplink">01:29, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your reply on my page, of course. Question is, if you know, is "Hemlock Valley Resort" the DBA name; because "Hemlock Valley Ski Area" is what's in BCGNIS. DBA will trump a BCGNIS designation...what's on their website?Skookum1 (talk) 18:34, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Hewlett-Packard logo.svg)

Thanks for uploading File:Hewlett-Packard logo.svg. 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) 05:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dermatology

Do you have a specific interest in dermatology? If so, I am always looking for more help ;) ---kilbad (talk) 00:08, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Fyksland pages

Seriously you really have nothing better to do than deleting other people's user sandbox subpages.

It's a sandbox for crying outloud! Of course I was using a template for my own work. --Kvasir (talk) 20:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Fuji Heavy Industries.svg)

Thanks for uploading File:Fuji Heavy Industries.svg. 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 '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 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) 08:48, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (File:Pacific Northwest National Laboratory logo.svg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pacific Northwest National Laboratory logo.svg. 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. FileBot (talk) 10:44, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (File:Fuji Heavy Industries.svg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fuji Heavy Industries.svg. 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. FileBot (talk) 20:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PNNL Logo, article, and other photo files

The tag line on the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory sign is not a slogan. It is a mandated notice of the Laboratory operator and is a part of the PNNL logo. The version you took from the Battelle annual report without the tag line is an incorrect version, per Battelle management, and should be deleted from Wikipedia.

The other photos which were included in the article were placed in direct support to illustrate the article. These should not have been removed without permission of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.

Also, the File:RichlandWaPNNL_1.jpg is a PNNL file, uploaded by another PNNL staff member. I have direct authority from PNNL management to replace the file. If this is a problem, then please delete this file and I will upload the correct version of the PNNL sign.

Although we greatly appreciate your diligence in keeping Wikipedia clean and free of advertising, etc., your edits are creating a factually incorrect article. Shanilea (talk) 18:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC) (talk) 1 September 2009[reply]

largest gold companies

you undid a change that was made to the latest cap data part of the first table. the change was made because the same source that the original information was taken from, changed the data. that's why the column is titled latest cap data it changes frequently. Grmike (talk) 04:17, 18 October 2009 (UTC)grmike sometimes i don't login so my edits appear under annonymous user. the data doesn't change a lot during the year so reverting it back isn't necessary, but other users who login are free to edit that column as long as the information is correct.Grmike (talk) 09:27, 25 October 2009 (UTC)grmike[reply]

redirects indexed by google?

At Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Shanilea DoE pages you said

"[redirects] still get indexed by search engines and will lead people to those pages, which look exactly like Wikipedia articles. I have been guided to some similar user pages via Google (MfD request here) in the past. - Gump Stump (talk) 23:33, 23 October 2009 (UTC)"

Are you sure? I have never seen a redirect come up one google search. Google searching takes into account your searching history and preferences; could that have some effect on your observations? Your comment is a surprise to me, and I'd like to know more. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:05, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the sake of translation

I just keep the articles in my space fpr the sake of translating them into Arabic, so when they are published through the google toolkit that I work on it, It becomes in my space in the Arabic version till. That is the purpose only, I am not using this way to say that I am the one who did these articles. If there is something I can do to avoid this misunderstanding, please let me know. Thanks so much. Nayrouz Aly (talk) 19:19, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Fuji Heavy Industries.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fuji Heavy Industries.svg. 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. Skier Dude (talk) 05:08, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Hewlett-Packard logo.svg

A tag has been placed on File:Hewlett-Packard logo.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file that is not an image, sound file or video clip [i.e. a Word document or PDF file] that has no encyclopedic use.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.

CompTIA

A+

Koman90 (Talk),
A CompTIA A+ Certified IT Technitian

06:15, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Gump Stump. You have new messages at Koman90's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

File:Centrica.svg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Centrica.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files 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. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 22:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC) Wikiwoohoo (talk) 22:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Better source request for File:Delta Chi Coat of Arms.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Delta Chi Coat of Arms.JPG. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Insite

Thank you so much! Comments like that keep me going. Mnation2 (talk) 22:17, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Mont Tremblant Resort logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Mont Tremblant Resort logo.svg. 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 11:20, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wg postal code2.jpg

I added a FUR in response to your request. Could you check if it meets with your approval, and either remove the tagging or let me know what is deficient? Thanks. DMacks (talk) 19:39, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image swapping

Can you explain what you meant by "Non-working image" when you reverted my picture change on the 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash article, in this edit? I believe the picture I added is preferred, as it is less cluttered and has better contrast with its surroundings. How was it not working for you? - Gump Stump (talk) 22:38, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. The picture didn't show for me at all, so I mistakenly assumed there was a problem with the image. I see now it was due to my AdBlock filter. The image is fine. C1010 (talk) 00:14, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Drilling rig

Hello, Gump Stump. You have new messages at Tuscumbia's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Orphaned non-free image File:Billiton logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Billiton logo.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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Billiton logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Billiton logo.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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:40, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Links

Hi, I just got a comment from you about links. What links are you talking about?

Do you mean Wikipedia links back to the BP article?

Sean7phil (talk) 23:32, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BP lax safety record

Numerous secondary sources have commented on BP's careless attitute towards safety, and connected the various accidents to this attitude. Please refrain from removing wikilinks that make these connections. Abductive (reasoning) 07:33, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But Wikipedia is not a forum for editor opinion and original research; are there sources listed in the Deepwater Horizon oil spill article that explicitly make these connections? I can't find any, except those that are in the BP article, which is a much more appropriate place for that discussion (in my opinion). - Gump Stump (talk) 07:54, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The sources I am familiar with are NPR and CNN. NPR in particular did a long piece on these failings, explicitly connecting the BP corporate culture and their money-grubbing with this string of deaths and disasters. I'm sure other sources exist. It is absolutely appropriate to connect these dots in the article, and the only reason people haven't done it better is they haven't gotten around to it. Abductive (reasoning) 08:44, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All right, if we are saying it's appropriate to connect those events in the Deepwater Horizon spill article, then let's add some sources for that, rather than wikilinking without any sources or context, which is not appropriate. I searched NPR and CNN, and came up with this CNN article and this NPR article that each mention all three events. Were they the ones you were referring to? If so I will add them and a statement relating the three incidents to the Deepwater Horizon spill article. - Gump Stump (talk) 16:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The NPR article sounds right. There may be other sources too. Abductive (reasoning) 16:49, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found a NY Times article as well; I've added a statement to the intro section. - Gump Stump (talk) 18:48, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow - I was really stunned to see your most recent edit, Gump Stump, adding this info right in the Intro. Needless to say, this is why I blew a gasket when you deleted those links! :) Good on you for doing the followup and locating those current sources that validate the point. Cgingold (talk) 22:11, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! - Gump Stump (talk) 06:18, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Breyer article

I contacted and received proper permission in posting the following article. Please remove the copyright infringement since that is not the case. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkahvedzic (talk • contribs) 19:25, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any evidence of where it came from, and that you have permission? The entire article appears copied from elsewhere online, without any permission. I linked to the details in my message on your talk page. - Gump Stump (talk) 21:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware of the fact it's an identical copy, therefore I have contacted the publisher and they will remove the identical article ASAP. Can you please remove the copyright infringement once they remove from their page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkahvedzic (talk • contribs) 05:28, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. What publisher are you talking about? And no, even if the external copy is deleted, the point is that it appears that someone else's work was copied onto Wikipedia without their permission. That is copyright infringement. If (as suspected) the article was copied to Wikipedia, then the person who wrote the article originally would have to release that text under a free license. There is no other way to keep the text here, because all contributions to Wikipedia must be freely licensed. Also, as an aside, you should sign your posts; put four tildes (like this: ~~~~) after your comment and it will add your signature. - Gump Stump (talk) 22:26, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The publisher of the article on the web page copied the work I made on wikipedia, since you noticed this-thank you, I have informed them to remove the identical copy. The wikipedia page was made my me and me alone. It was copied by the web side designer in question. Thank you for the tips on editing and signing my work, I am still a work in progress. 16:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.114.132.2 (talk)

This is very confusing. Who are you? Are you Bkahvedzic or Ms4cd, and you just forgot to login? Can you provide any proof that you wrote the Wikipedia article? Because it looks like all you (editing as 38.114.132.2) did to the Jim Breyer article is some minor edits and adding of links, along with the removal of maintenance templates (which is unacceptable, if the problem listed in the template hasn't been addressed). The only user that actually added significant content to the article is Ms4cd, who started the article, and it was already in almost the same form it is today. - Gump Stump (talk) 17:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is confusing, I made the article (Ms4cd is my friend who also worked on the project with me. Some other edits were also completed myself, forgot to log in at the time) after interviewing the person in question I added the article as it stood before your flag. Maintenance removal was completed by me as well since it was flagged for no references present, since then all claims were backed up by proper references. I have multiple emails from the gentleman in questions as proof and can ask for more if necessary. Let me know what you have in mind. Bkahvedzic (talk) 17:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think what we need is proof that either 1) Ms4cd wrote the article (because he/she is the only one who actually added any content), and/or 2) that the webpage that has the exact same text as the Jim Breyer article on Wikipedia actually copied Wikipedia, and not the other way around. Can you help with either of those things? - Gump Stump (talk) 02:05, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, what kind of proof did you need?38.114.132.2 (talk) 18:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC) That was me, just forgot to log in...Bkahvedzic (talk) 19:50, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any material evidence (e-mails, for example?) that can prove the things I just mentioned. The article on Wikipedia was complete from the first edit--this is suspicious when it's coming from a user that hasn't edited anything else except that particular article, and only has four edits total. If you can prove that the Jim Breyer article isn't just copied and pasted from some external source, that would help. If you are still in touch with Ms4cd, it would be very good to hear from him/her directly. - Gump Stump (talk) 16:19, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm an administrator who works with copyright concerns on Wikipedia. Since the conversation seems to be taking place here, I wanted to explain the simplest way to verify that the article is free of copyright concerns. Apologies, Gump Stump, for cluttering up your page, but since there are evidently multiple individuals involved here, I thought it might be best to keep it in one place. :)

We know that sometimes official sites do copy without requisite attribution from Wikipedia, but our copyright policies require that we be conservative, particularly because official sites are generally more likely to be copied from than the other way around. The simplest way to resolve this is for somebody at that website to put a notice on the page indicating that the content is not original, but was copied from Wikipedia. They can release it under one of two free licenses. (See Wikipedia:Reuse.) A usable statement might look like this:

This article is licensed under the <a href="http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html">GNU Free Documentation License</a>. It uses material from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Breyer">Wikipedia article "Jim Breyer"</a>.

Alternatively, if someone connected to [1] can write to the Wikimedia Foundation confirming that they did not originate but have copied the content, then the copyright question will be resolved. Contact must come from either an e-mail address clearly connected with the domain or listed at the website's contact page. In order for the content to remain they must either explicitly acknowledge that the content was here before it was there or, if they dispute that, license it so that we are able to duplicate it. (See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for the form to be used in that instance.) The address they should contact is permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org. Please make sure that they include the name of the article on Wikipedia to which they are referring.

If you know that they have sent such a letter, please place {{OTRS pending}} at the article's talk page, curly brackets and all. This will help to prevent the premature removal of the content. However, if perchance the content is removed prematurely, it can easily be restored when the letter is received and logged. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:57, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I have just received an official email from info at breyercapital dot com saying the article was indeed copied. If there is anything else I can do please let me know.Bkahvedzic (talk) 16:57, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you forwarded it to the Wikimedia Foundation? If so, it's just a matter of waiting for it to clear. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:32, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They sent out two emails, one to my personal account and the other I was CC'd. The second email was sent to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org stating of the copy issue. Do you think I should forward the email sent to me? Essentially it states the same thing. Thank you for all your help.Bkahvedzic (talk) 19:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, if the second e-mail covers the same thing, no reason to forward your letter. Typically, you might expect some action within a few days. Thank you for taking the time to follow through. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:59, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:TimHorton 03.jpg

Frankly, I have no idea. I don't even remember tagging it. Sorry I can't be more help. I suspect that I doubted that it was the uploader's own work, given where it was taken, without further explanation/substantiation, but I have no clue why I used that tag. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 23:31, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:G20_world_leaders.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-20_major_economies This image was deleted. I am PISSED! This is not fair.

I understand that I don't own this image. But I did invest a lot of time and do oww the original tears and sweat that went to it. For every delete you make, subjectively and like a dictator, it has a human consequence. How dare you. Seriously. Why not show the courtesy and notify the author and have a respectful conversation? I find this whole going around deleting really offensive and elitest. Thanks a lot guys for making Wikipedia suck and blocking something that really could of contributed to the common good.

Wikipedia is the most frustrating thing ever and I absolute hate some of these things. HATE IT!:

1. I spend approx 5+ hours working on something like this image and then someone just swoops it and deletes it. What gives you the right to do this? This was an honest piece of work. No one made you the delete boss. How would you like it if I went and deleted all your work. Wikipedia is SO elitest. Yuck.

2. I should be notified to any changes and especially DELETES that are made to MY work.

3. I am extremely upset that the "deletion debate" happened and I was not involved. This is the most attrocious thing ever. Like a court case where the defendant and his lawyer are not present. I should of been automatically notified.

4. Tracking the history of the changes and deletions to my work was so hard. I could view all changes to a page, but I want to view all activity on my specific image and the changes made to it.

As to the merits of this "deletion debate": 1. This image was self-made. No I didn't personally photography all these world leaders. Du.

2. FYI The Obama photo is NOT a cropped version of the flickr image. It is from a different image. OverlordQ you are wrong.

3. Thank you 211.181.143.3 the file is useful and can contribute. I think it can and thus there is no harm in including it.

4. The cowboy obama in my opinion, is not amateurish but shows a unique side of obama and an uniquely american yank. Official portrati would be fine with me. The mature wikipedia thing to do would be to contact me and ask me to change or use the original image to change yourself (or ask for the alterantive .pub file).

5. Emperor Akihito and Queen Elizabeth aren't directly relevant BUT they show the leaders and political figures of each countries. THe top 2 both head of state and president. They follow form and serve as a comparison of political figures and queens/emperors as they relate to the geopolitical environment.

6. Obama photo copyright, why delete the whole image, change the image.

Summary: - I apologize for being immature and naive. This is why I want to hate wikipedia and it really really really frustrates, offends me and makes me never want to contribute anything ever again.

- Why did people hate wikipedia? Beacause it is so difficult and the least user friendly thing ever to edit and because of elitest wikipedia editors who thing they are better than others and own this site. YOU DON'T. A person who has made 1 edit is just as important as someone who has made 1000 edits.

- The structural flaws in wikipedia (from not including me in deletion debates, to techinical difficulty such as not making specific file history clear, not notifying me of changes to my work, messiness in user interfactes etc. created this.

- Overall, you're ruthlessness and complete and utter indifference TO THE HUMAN BEING behind the work is what holds wikipedia back.

taylorluker@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Taylorluker (talk • contribs) 09:10, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Taylorlurker. I assume you are talking about File:G20 world leaders.png, which was deleted after this discussion. I cannot speak for the person who nominated the file for deletion, and I cannot see the image history now (since it was deleted), but whomever listed it for deletion should have notified the person who uploaded the file. If that was you, you should have been notified.

As for the image itself: derivative works are tricky. You have to be sure that every other person's work that you are using is freely licensed, and you are supposed to list the source of every image you are using so that this can be verified by others. In this case, at least one of the pictures you used, the picture of Obama, was not freely licensed and so the image is incompatible with Wikimedia Commons.

If you would like to edit the file and upload it to Commons again (after making absolutely sure that all of the content you are using is freely licensed, and stating where you got each image you are using), you can make a request at Commons:Undeletion requests. If you make your case there, I imagine someone will be glad to send you the image so that you can revise the image and upload it again.

Finally, please assume good faith when dealing with your fellow editors. The image was deleted for a legitimate reason, but if you uploaded it and weren't notified of the deletion discussion then I apologize. - Gump Stump (talk) 16:32, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Canadian Grenadier Guards cap badge.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Canadian Grenadier Guards cap badge.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 uploaded, 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) 20:55, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As to being welcomed by a banned user, I inadvertently had a civil conversation with a notorious vandal who later took to trolling me ;) :D 76.117.247.55 (talk) 17:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Common Ground (NYC)

Referring to this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Ground_(NYC)

I believe you deleted:

- Organizational Accomplishments

- New Ventures

- Goals

- Key Staff (Board Officers, Board Members, and Senior Management Team).

I have reverted the live webpage back to the work I originally did. I appreciate your input, but I respectfully completely disagree.

"promotional medium"/"overly promotional"/"uneyclopedic"

The above things I stated are unbiased, fact based and are in no way persuasive. Stating the people that work there is no different than saying Bill Gates worked at Microsoft. Is that promotional? No. It provides fact-based information. Goals of a strategic nature also provide key insights into the organization. How is stating this type of stuff any different from stating for-profit organizations profits/revenues? Isn't this in fact promotional? In the same way that criticism can be said about organizations, positive information should be equally allowed. In fact in a sales pitch I would probably not use any of the above information. Finally, in what way is it explicitly promotional? It's not. The only promotion would be for volunteer time or money. Neither of these is mentioned or suggested even in the slightest bit.

"connected with Common Ground in any way" ("as a paid worker or a volunteer")

I am not a paid worker of volunteer. However for the record I don't see why this would be a conflict of interest. If I am student and edit a page on my College is this a conflict of interest? If I am professor and add information to an academic page I am knowledgeable on, is that a conflict of interest? No. "Insiders," volunteers and employees are in a unique position to provide information in a neutral non-promotional way.

I would happen to discuss over email. I find it hard to have a fluid conversation over Wikipedia.

taylorluker@gmail.com

Thanks.

P.S.> I do not want an edit war. I WOULD like:

1 a legitimate way to solve this issue

2 to have an honest dialogue.

It is not far that you (or anyone) says something is so, and it is so. I don't believe in Wikipedia Gods, why should you have the last say?

A staff list, simply provides more information on the way an organization is structured and key people in the organization. The same way that other wikipedia pages list key figures with companies. Unencyclopedic and thus applied promotional, I don't see how a staff list fits this description. In what was is saying Joe Johns run IT promotional? It is not in any conceivable way.

Simple stating that is unencylopedic is not an argument. As far as it being an issue. It is an issue to me:

1 I worked very hard on it

2 I strongly feel it is valuable to the Wikipedia community

3 I don't think that people should swoop in an arbitrarily delete anothers work.

Can you please not speak in acronyms. I don't know what this statement means: "COI editor whose contributions were previously fixed."

I am not employed nor/do I volunteer for Common Ground, although this should be outside the realm of the debate. Again, what harm is an "insider" posting encyclopedic material. None. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Taylorluker (talk • contribs) 21:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@Gump Stump - You might be confused by this comment by Taylorlurker; it was intended for me. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hitachi.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hitachi.svg. 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:39, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sochi logo

The issue of putting the Sochi 2014 logo on Commons has already been discussed. This went up to the legal counsel of the Wikimedia Foundation. The Foundation's legal counsel is of the opinion that this image passes the bar of creativity. Especially after some exchanges from the International Olympic Committee legal team. Hektor (talk) 08:12, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Do you have a record of that? I'd like to put a note of that on the file's discussion page, and list a Commons copy of the logo for deletion. -Gump Stump (talk) 17:29, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Gump Stump. You have new messages at Ckatz's talk page.
Message added 03:52, 15 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

2011 AFC Asian Cup

Hi, I saw the article 2011 AFC Asian Cup and became very angry for your last editing. I know those image is un-free but i have request to you please not removed pictures untill the ending of tournament. It's needed for article. Please do this work in February and know undo pictures. please, thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.133.189.183 (talk) 10:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but Wikipedia's policy on non-free content states that for non-free content to be used, no free equivalent could be created (see WP:NFCC, number 1). It's very easy to take a freely licensed photo of those stadiums (they have been built, haven't been destroyed, and people can see and take photos of them easily). Because they fail this criteria, the photos can't be used. There are lots of places where you can find freely licensed images (a good list here); maybe try finding photos of the stadiums on these sites? -Gump Stump (talk) 00:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Paralympics Task Force Invitation!

	You are cordially invited to join the Paralympics Task Force!
	You appear to be someone that may be interested in joining the Paralympics Task Force. Please accept this formal invitation from a current member of the project. We offer a place for you to connect with users who also like the Paralympic Games and facilitate team work in the development of Paralympic Games articles.
	If you decide to join the project, please add your name to this list.
	I hope you accept! - Bib (talk)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:40, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sanofi-Aventis.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sanofi-Aventis.svg. 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 in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:42, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:AbitibiBowater.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:AbitibiBowater.svg. 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 19:00, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Aetna.svg)

Thanks for uploading File:Aetna.svg. 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deepwater Horizon oil spill

Hi, Gump Stump. You have been an active editor on Deepwater Horizon oil spill and/or its related articles. During some last months there has been an active development of cleaning up that article by splitting off large sections into separate articles. A Deepwater Horizon series were created (all the articles accessible by Template:Deepwater Horizon oil spill series. You are invited to assist by cleaning-up and copy-editing these articles. There are also ongoing discussion concerning additional split-offs. You could see split-off templates at the article's page and find discussions at the talk page. Your input would be useful for building consensus on these issues. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 23:34, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Canadian Grenadier Guards cap badge.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Canadian Grenadier Guards cap badge.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:39, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kronan at FAC

Sail ho, matey!

You're invited to comment on the FAC of the article on Kronan.

Peter ^Isotalo 15:02, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:AthabascaUniversity.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:AthabascaUniversity.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 10:03, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Kimberly-Clark.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kimberly-Clark.svg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:46, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]