Welcome!
Hello FRS, 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! - Vsmith 03:14, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
I have built a script to speed up voting on AFDs and am looking for feedback. Please have a go! jnothman talk 06:46, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I hv just noticed your edits on above where you deleted a section titled "22 vows" stating that it is copyvio. However, facts are never copyvio. For example, if I copy the list of Ten Commandments from a website, it would still not be copyvio as the list of commandments is accepted as a fact. Hence, I'd be reverting your edits after adding explanation in the talk page. -- Gurubrahma 16:27, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
The link on the talk page has now been fixed. Silly templates... -- Cel e stianpower háblame 15:16, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi! As per AfD suggestions, I rewrote the ACQ-Kingdom Broadcasting Network article. Since you voted there, I thought you'd like to know. -- William Pietri 03:09, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your excellent compromise text on the AMA article, and for pointing out my error. You are an asset to the WP. Danlovejoy 22:13, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I've finally done something about the anonymous edit situation, rather than just bleating about it in my edit summaries! laying the case before the Village Pump (here). I encourage everyone to support the move on Village Pump; and in the edit summaries of your reverts to link there — although I've been completely unable to figure out how to do it. . . . Best, Bill 13:55, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Hi FRS, thanks a ton for voting on my RfA. The final tally was 50-0-0. While I did not agree with you entirely during our first encounter on B. R. Ambedkar, I was impressed that you cared for NPOV and were bold. You've been doing great work in fostering NPOV on Wikipedia and have showed a willingness to engage other editors in discussion, such as in Talk:Babbar Khalsa. I do believe that you will work whole-heartedlty in making Wikipedia, a much better place. For your sincere efforts, I feel that the butterfly would be an appropriate compliment. btw, you've removed the stuff abt three jewels in Ambedkar article. That may be appropriate per WP:V as we do not seem to hv any online source for that; however, I believe the information is correct (abt mass conversions twice within the space of ten days and administering only the vows the second time) as I remember reading that info in an Amar Chitra Katha comic more than a decade back. -- Gurubrahma 06:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Firstly, a quick factual correction: the B. R. Ambedkar image wasn't uploaded by an anonymous IP: it was uploaded by Praneeth11, as the page history clearly shows.
Onto the more substantive issue: the copyright on a photo belongs to the photographer, and will (in general) expire 70 years after the death of the photographer (in the US and the EU, anyway). Hence I think it's more than possible that it is still covered by copyright and as such can't be used on Wikipedia. Without some form of definitive evidence that the image is no longer covered by copyright, I think the best thing to do is to delete the image.
There's also now a technical issue: the image has now been deleted from Wikipedia, and (unlike articles) backups of images aren't kept in the database, so the only way to restore the image now would be from a backup of the database. -- Pak21 15:26, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Hi FRS,
I have replied to your vote, and after some consideration, you're right. I apologize for any comments that I have made. Please see my RfB and your vote for the rest of the story.
Kind regards, Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 22:15, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
You requested a copyright examination regarding a text authored in India in 1956. Sadly copyright examinations is not the right place for your request. The most common reason is that the content has already been added/uploaded to Wikipedia. Such cases (violations or not) are taken care of at Wikipedia:Copyright problems.
Your request will eventually be moved to List of requests which don't belong here on the copyright examinations page. Please try to find the right place for your request as soon as possible. We hope that your request will find the right place and get answered. -- Easyas12c 01:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for your support on my RfA. The final outcome was (30/2/0). I will do my best at the position I now am in. Thanks again! -- W.marsh 03:03, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Hey... I don’t know if you have any interest in this subject anymore, but there is yet another attempt to bury the Islamofascism page elsewhere. If you’re interested, the debate is here: [ [4]] IronDuke 19:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Wikipedia Watch. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia Watch (5th nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello FRS, 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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! - Vsmith 03:14, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
I have built a script to speed up voting on AFDs and am looking for feedback. Please have a go! jnothman talk 06:46, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I hv just noticed your edits on above where you deleted a section titled "22 vows" stating that it is copyvio. However, facts are never copyvio. For example, if I copy the list of Ten Commandments from a website, it would still not be copyvio as the list of commandments is accepted as a fact. Hence, I'd be reverting your edits after adding explanation in the talk page. -- Gurubrahma 16:27, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
The link on the talk page has now been fixed. Silly templates... -- Cel e stianpower háblame 15:16, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi! As per AfD suggestions, I rewrote the ACQ-Kingdom Broadcasting Network article. Since you voted there, I thought you'd like to know. -- William Pietri 03:09, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your excellent compromise text on the AMA article, and for pointing out my error. You are an asset to the WP. Danlovejoy 22:13, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
I've finally done something about the anonymous edit situation, rather than just bleating about it in my edit summaries! laying the case before the Village Pump (here). I encourage everyone to support the move on Village Pump; and in the edit summaries of your reverts to link there — although I've been completely unable to figure out how to do it. . . . Best, Bill 13:55, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Hi FRS, thanks a ton for voting on my RfA. The final tally was 50-0-0. While I did not agree with you entirely during our first encounter on B. R. Ambedkar, I was impressed that you cared for NPOV and were bold. You've been doing great work in fostering NPOV on Wikipedia and have showed a willingness to engage other editors in discussion, such as in Talk:Babbar Khalsa. I do believe that you will work whole-heartedlty in making Wikipedia, a much better place. For your sincere efforts, I feel that the butterfly would be an appropriate compliment. btw, you've removed the stuff abt three jewels in Ambedkar article. That may be appropriate per WP:V as we do not seem to hv any online source for that; however, I believe the information is correct (abt mass conversions twice within the space of ten days and administering only the vows the second time) as I remember reading that info in an Amar Chitra Katha comic more than a decade back. -- Gurubrahma 06:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Firstly, a quick factual correction: the B. R. Ambedkar image wasn't uploaded by an anonymous IP: it was uploaded by Praneeth11, as the page history clearly shows.
Onto the more substantive issue: the copyright on a photo belongs to the photographer, and will (in general) expire 70 years after the death of the photographer (in the US and the EU, anyway). Hence I think it's more than possible that it is still covered by copyright and as such can't be used on Wikipedia. Without some form of definitive evidence that the image is no longer covered by copyright, I think the best thing to do is to delete the image.
There's also now a technical issue: the image has now been deleted from Wikipedia, and (unlike articles) backups of images aren't kept in the database, so the only way to restore the image now would be from a backup of the database. -- Pak21 15:26, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Hi FRS,
I have replied to your vote, and after some consideration, you're right. I apologize for any comments that I have made. Please see my RfB and your vote for the rest of the story.
Kind regards, Alex Schenck (that's Linuxbeak to you) 22:15, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
You requested a copyright examination regarding a text authored in India in 1956. Sadly copyright examinations is not the right place for your request. The most common reason is that the content has already been added/uploaded to Wikipedia. Such cases (violations or not) are taken care of at Wikipedia:Copyright problems.
Your request will eventually be moved to List of requests which don't belong here on the copyright examinations page. Please try to find the right place for your request as soon as possible. We hope that your request will find the right place and get answered. -- Easyas12c 01:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for your support on my RfA. The final outcome was (30/2/0). I will do my best at the position I now am in. Thanks again! -- W.marsh 03:03, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Hey... I don’t know if you have any interest in this subject anymore, but there is yet another attempt to bury the Islamofascism page elsewhere. If you’re interested, the debate is here: [ [4]] IronDuke 19:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Wikipedia Watch. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia Watch (5th nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)