CeruleanFilms

A tag has been placed on Tyler Norman, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Subject lacks notability

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Sanfranman59 08:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of How To Build a City

A tag has been placed on How To Build a City, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD a7.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Dean Wormer 04:12, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Bohos

Got any source for your contention that all these people are "known members"? For that matter, a source for members being known as "Bohos" would be nice too. -- Zsero (talk) 07:20, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

-Yes, there are numerous official lists that have been posted to the Internet and the Wikipedia page on Bohemian Grove addresses the fact that they call themselves "Bohos".

Rubbish. Cite such a list; the WP article says the membership list is private, so how could it have been posted anywhere? Cite your source or I will revert it all now. -- Zsero (talk) 07:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

http://www.pehi.eu/organisations/Bohemian_Grove_members_list.htm http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/210607_bg.html (from Wikipedia's own page): The Bohemian Club is a private club; only active members of the Club (known as "Bohos") and their guests may visit the Grove.

1. The first list doesn't even claim to be a membership list. Not everyone who visits the Grove is a member.
2. It's not an official list of any kind; it seems to be the work of one crank. Hardly a reliable source.
3. The second source does claim to be an official membership list, but so what? An anonymous package that some crank claims showed up on his doorstep? That's a source?
4. As for the "Boho" thing, where's your source for that? The WP page doesn't cite a source, and you certainly can't cite WP as your source!

-- Zsero (talk) 07:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Who do you work for? Oh, and I have a relative who knows Alex Jones personally. He is far from being a crank.

Who Zsero works for is irrelevant. I've rolled back all the cats because it seems entirely inappropriate to me to be categorising people based on a self-published visitors list. Also, if we categorised all former US presidents according to what clubs and groups they belong to, the cats on the pages would go on for pages and pages. I personally think this category is irrelevant, unverified and unencyclopedic and I think it should be deleted myself, but I shall leave that for other editors to decide. Sarah 07:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Category:Films shot in multiple formats

I have recently nominated this category, which you created, for deletion. Please see the discussion here. --Eliyak T·C 21:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:The_Life_Aquatic_Cylindrical_Perspective.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:The_Life_Aquatic_Cylindrical_Perspective.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Dream out loud (talk) 01:40, 21 September 2012 (UTC)