User talk:Diehard2k5/Archive

Welcome!!

WELCOME!! Hello, Diehard2k5! I want to personally welcome you on behalf of the Wikipedia community. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you haven't already, you can put yourself new user log and list of users so you can be properly introduced to everyone. Don't forget to be bold, and don't be afraid of hungry Wikipedians...there's a rule about not biting newcomers. Some other good links are the tutorial, how to edit a page, or if you're really stuck, see the help pages. If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a ♪ at my talk page...and again, welcome!--ViolinGirl^♪ 01:06, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Sure! You did better than I did when I first came...I replyed in my own discussion page! Hope you like Wikipedia. --ViolinGirl^♪ 01:33, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, just to let you know that the nominations for Lost Boyz and The Dead 50's for deletion needed a bit more doing to them before they were eligible nominations for deletion. See articles for deletion for more information. -- Francs2000 02:13, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Rowan Halsall

Hi. Saw you had nominated Rowan Halsall for deletion. If this is to go through, you need to give a reason for nominating it, as well. Could you please take a look at it? Bjelleklang - talk 16:35, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, now you've removed the AfD tag. If you've changed your mind, please confirm this on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rowan Halsall and we'll close the deletion process. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 18:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

For pages that can be speedily deleted (WP:CSD), the tag is {{delete}}. Don't afd speedily deletable pages! enochlau (talk) 23:53, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Jason_Newsted.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jason_Newsted.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. -- Carnildo 22:32, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Deletion warnings

Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please place {{hangon}} on the page and make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 20:15, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Discussion (esp. for Fall Out Boy/Project Rocket Split EP

Please discuss major changes in article's talk pages. Also, cut-and-paste moves are completely unacceptable. Valuble edit histories are lost, which makes it a lot harder to track changes. Most of your edits are fine and dandy, but if you think a page needs to be moved, discuss it on the talk page and go through proper channels described at WP:RM, if it's not uncontroversial and can be fixed with a simple pressing of the 'move' button. For this page, it being relatively new, it's not that big of a deal, and it's too late to anything about it. However, things like undiscussed editing (that is substantial and/or controversial) or cut-and-paste moving create a lot of unnecessary work in resolving it, and you may have to deal with someone significantly more powerful and/or mean than me. Just letting you know. —Akrabbim^talk 02:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Blanking your own user page

Okay, this is generally very looked down upon in the Wikipedia community. I'm putting back what you took out. I'm not sure exactly what could happen if you do this, but I know that it's bad. I'm not going to report you or anything, but talk pages are there for a reason. You can archive them if you want, but removing discussion (vandalism is another story, like with Stepp-Wolf) is a nono. I suppose this is your fairly mild unofficial first warning from a non-admin about this. I hope you understand. —Akrabbim^talk 02:21, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

XO (Song)

Hey I'm glad you noticed-- There aren't many people that actually look into whether the information for an AfD nomination is true. AdamBiswanger1 23:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:PWentz RS.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:PWentz RS.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Esprit15d 12:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Clarence Chew

My sympathies if you knew this subject; however, they do not satisfy WP:BIO notability guidelines. Also, Wikipedia is not for tributes. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

From WP:NOT: Memorials. Wikipedia is not the place to honor departed friends and relatives. Subjects of encyclopedia articles must have a claim to fame besides being fondly remembered. Once again, my condolences. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Copyright and tv.com

You said: "If you know anything about TV.com, you'll know that it's user submitted, just as WikiPedia is. So the stuff on there is not copywrited in any way."

I am sorry but you are confused. The original writers would own the copyright and, according to this page, grant CNET Networks a license to republish. But the content is protected by copyright. --Yamla 16:15, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

You said: "Oh. So basically if you submit a summary or anything to there, they now own the copyright, and you can't use it anywhere else?"

No. For that site, the original uploader still owns the copyright, they just license the text (or whatever) to CNET Networks. That gives CNET the right to reproduce it for free, etc. etc., but you can still use it yourself elsewhere. So for tv.com, if the person who uploaded the text to tv.com also uploaded it to Wikipedia, there'd be no problem. But neither you nor I may use the text from tv.com here unless we are the original authors. --Yamla 19:36, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah. Okay. I understand now. Thanks! --DieHard2k5 | Talk 19:39, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Help Me

Trying to add an image to Innamorata (album) the image will not show up. --DieHard2k5 | Talk 21:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Fixed... you needed to add a "cover size" parameter. You can also add a "cover name" parameter to label it. I'll hang around if you need any more help. Just ask on my talk page if you need any more help. --The Prophet Wizard of the Crayon Cake 21:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Ahh. Thanks. That sure was frustrating. Thanks for helping out though! --DieHard2k5 | Talk 22:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Anytime! Helping folks is like a fetish of mine. Just give me a message if you need anything. Most of the work I do is mediating disputes, so that's what I tend to have a knack for doing. If you get in a conflict of any sort, call me first. ;) --The Prophet Wizard of the Crayon Cake 22:14, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Will do, thanks! --DieHard2k5 | Talk 22:21, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Ramones

why did you remove the image from this article without explanation? i don't see how it doesn't belong. Joeyramoney 05:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi. The fair-use rationale for that particular cover states that it can only be used to signify the album in question. So it's fine for the Ramones (album) article, but not okay for the Ramones (group) article. =] Feel free to find another, fair-use, promotional, or free-use image for the article, and I'll gladly assist you with adding it to the page. --DieHard2k5 | Talk 15:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Taking Back Sunday

I see you have removed post-hardcore as genre vandalism. TBS is not a pop-punk band at all. Infact, they really arn't even punk. Although some sites like AOL classify them as pop-punk and they sometimes have a pop sound to them, they are not pop-punk. Infact, TBS isn't punk, they are post-hardcore. A biography of them decribes their music as "Formed in 1999, Amityville, NY's Taking Back Sunday took their version of melodic hardcore from bands like Lifetime, Endpoint, and Sunny Day Real Estate, as well as guitarist Ed Reyes' emo band the Movielife. The band's first demo, a five-song CD, was released in February of 2001. After a year of self-promotion and touring, including shows with At the Drive-In and Alkaline Trio, Taking Back Sunday signed to Victory Records. The band immediately went into New Jersey's Big Blue Meanie Recording Studios with producer Sal Villanueva and engineer Tim Gilles to record a full-length debut. That album, Tell All Your Friends, layered Adam Lazzara's emotional vocals and the dual-guitar assault of Reyes and John Nolan for a classic hardcore sound with pop songwriting components. It was released on Victory in March of 2002.

As you can see they are indeed a post-hardcore band and as much as I hate to admit it, emo sounding. Now I find nothing wrong with pop punk as I listen to Greenday, Blink 182, and my favorite band is Alkaline Trio, as well as I love punk music. There are far too many changes and vandalisms to the TBS page about genre. Such changes make it seem very un-encyclopedic and inacurite. By the way, I do not vandalize, I find such acts to be childish. I also took many classes in high school about music and classification. I don't want to start an edit war here, nor do I want to make you mad or anything. I hope we can colaborate on the TBS article to make it the best it can possibly be in the future. Cheers and have a good evening. Darthgriz98 01:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for the misunderstanding. While their new music does have more of an emo sound to it, I do not think I would classify it as post-hardcore. Post-hardcore usually has screaming in it, such as bands like Chiodos, Atreyu, stuff like that. Taking Back Sunday, I agree is emo, but their older stuff, ie, Where You Want To Be, Tell All Your Friends definately has a pop-punk feel to it, similar to Fall Out Boy or Hawthorne Heights. But I agree with you, I think Rock/Emo, and possibly Post-Hardcore would be alright with me, I just reverted your edit because when ever I see a genre change I think that it's some supposed Punk fanatic who believes that only The Damned should be listed as punk. Again, sorry for the misunderstanding. Thanks! --DieHard2k5 | Talk 03:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:JTrohman.jpg

I believe you, and according to [1] CC declarations are irrevocable, but unfortunately for us, Flickr doesn't keep a revision history so there's no way for us to prove that it was ever cc-by or cc-by-sa in the first place. This is a problem that affects Commons too and there's been discussion about that but no viable solution. It's probably a good idea to leave the photographer a comment, something like, "Thanks for licensing this cc-by-sa! It's been uploaded to Wikipedia blah blah blah" which could leave a sort of proof (but since you can edit Flickr comments after you leave them, it's not exactly foolproof either). howcheng {chat} 06:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Track Of Tyler Hilton

You said: "Um. Excuse me, but why was the image for tracks of tyler hilton deleted? I thought we already discussed this? Am I an abusive sockpuppet now?"

I'm sorry, that comment wasn't directed at you at all. SKITTLES is an abusive sockpuppet. Standard policy when one of these is discovered is to undo all edits by the abusive account. --Yamla 17:27, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

You said: "Oh.. Okay. So If I were to reupload the image and place it in the same location, that would be okay?"

Yes, so long as the license and fair-use is in tact. If you are at all unclear about that, upload it and send me the link and I'll make sure it is good to go. I'm sorry, I can see why you thought this action may have been targeted at you but nothing could be further from the truth. --Yamla 17:44, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Help Me

User Mr. Terrific II is doing some serious vandalism. --DieHard2k5 | Talk 00:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Blocked him. However, do not put a test5 warning if you aren't an administrator. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 00:33, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

You're right. It was a vandalism-only account, so it's indefinite. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 00:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk archive problems

Moved your mistakenly created talk archive to User talk:Diehard2k5/Archive. No problem. ;) --Andeh 00:51, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I moved the original, so what you pasted to begin with is still there. I have never used Werdnabot by the way.--Andeh 00:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

An automated message from Werdnabot

Hi there, I tried to archive your user talk page, but it seems that you have an error in your Werdnabot directive that prevented me from correctly archiving your User talk page. Please review this error, or contact Werdna648 for assistance. Werdnabot ^(DNBF)/_T\^C 01:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk archive problems

Moved your mistakenly created talk archive to User talk:Diehard2k5/Archive. No problem. ;) --Andeh 00:51, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I moved the original, so what you pasted to begin with is still there. I have never used Werdnabot by the way.--Andeh 00:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

An automated message from Werdnabot

Hi there, I tried to archive your user talk page, but it seems that you have an error in your Werdnabot directive that prevented me from correctly archiving your User talk page. Please review this error, or contact Werdna648 for assistance. Werdnabot ^(DNBF)/_T\^C 01:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Dawson's Creek

The Dawson's Creek Featured article review had 3 votes for removing its featured status and 0 for maintaining it. Furthermore, none of the concerns raised in the review had been addressed. Joelito (talk) 18:21, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Assholes by Nature deletion

Diehard, I'm not exactly sure what you did, but I fixed your deletion listing. It belongs at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Assholes by Nature, not at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/notability. You also need to follow all the instructions and so, I've added the listing to today's log. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

V for Vendetta Parliament Exploding Photograph

The photo I edited into the film article for "V for Vendetta" is not that much of a spoiler, as it is a screenshot from an advertisement for the movie, so anyone who has seen an ad for the movie has seen this shot in the teaser. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miketanton (talk • contribs)

Okay, I just thought It'd kind of be a big spoiler. --DieHard2k5 16:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Kronos (software)

Hi. Just letting you know that you should add a {{subst:afd}} tag to articles that you set up afd's for. Have a nice day! --DieHard2k5 00:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I was just doing that and ran into an edit conflict with you doing so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JLM (talk • contribs)

No problem! Also, remember to sign your posts with 4 tilde's ~~~~ =] --DieHard2k5 00:19, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Panic! Consensus box

Thanks for help with reverts on PAtD page. When you revert please remember to keep consensus box at top to help with vandals Hackajar 10:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Brand New Genre

Stop changing the Brand New page to make their genre "Emo". It is "Alternative" for a reason. Since the band classifies themselves as "Alternative" and not "Emo" it should be left as "Alternative", no matter what your personal opinion of their genre is. Wieners 17:33, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

No need to be rude, sir. I was simply reverting what seemed to be genre vandalism. I have tons of bands on my watch-list, and trolls are constantly taking the emo tag off of bands. Your perception of a band is no better than mine, I always take into consideration a consensus. So i'm going to leave it as alternative rock/pop-punk (since I know that for a fact), I'll take up a discussion/vote for the emo tag. Again, sorry if I took this the wrong way, but I just get tired of the vandals some times.

Have a nice day! --DieHard2k5 23:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if I came off as rude, but we've had discussions on the subject and most people don't even like the "Pop Punk" genre listed. I did not mean to offend but I know most people don't like the "Emo" tag and will vandilise the whole page when they see it (For who knows what reason.) Wieners 17:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Fallout Boy Infobox

I did NOT screw it up! Fallout Boy are NOT emo! They have nothing to do with the sound at all. Show me what's so "emo" about them and maybe I'll believe you. Valkyrie Missile

That's not what I was talking about. You removed the | from the end of the genre which screwed it up. And as far as the emo tag, that's something you discuss on the talk page. There's way to many anonymous vandals removing tags from genre's unannounced. Sorry if you got the wrong idea. --DieHard2k5 00:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Alright, man. Sorry. I'm just sick of the band getting labelled "emo". As for the | thing, that was completely unintentional. Apologies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyrie Missle (talk • contribs)

Thanks. As for the "emo" opinion, i'd suggest entering something in the discussion page. There are a lot of verifyable sources that label F.O.B. as emo, so opinions don't really hold much weight. Thanks for understanding. --DieHard2k5 00:55, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Panic! at the Disco genre

I saw you added emo back in the Panic! at the Disco article twice today. Please see the genre debate on the talk page, as a rough consensus has been reached and it was not to include emo. Thank you and have a nice day. --HarryCane 13:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I would say that a consensus was not agreed upon. Half of the comments on the page were anonymous trolls that said "Panic! At The Disco SuckS! So there not emo", or "Emo sucks, so panic! at the disco is not emo". I would say that nothing there was official, and you have no right to tell any other editor what to put there. I'll just leave it as Alternative Rock with dance influences, but I wouldn't suggest telling other editors what to do. Thanks. --DieHard2k5 21:59, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• Thank you for a third party peer review on this article Hackajar 11:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

TBS genre

I'd suggest not automatically reverting genre changes on Taking Back Sunday. Your one view on the subject may not be shared by others as a whole. We need to get veritable sources and/or the band themselves classifying their genre. Post-Hardcore is definately not the genre of the band however, if you've ever heard hardcore music. Perhaps an influence, but not the genre. I'd sugges tsomething along the lines of an alternative rock band with punk/hardcore/emo influences. Reply if you'd like to talk about this issue further --DieHard2k5 17:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I've been working on this one for awhile, and it's quite difficult to get a genre for them. A lot of sites say emo, they themselves don't classify themselves as emo but they probably just don't want to have negative terms with them. As for post hardcore yes I am familar with hardcore bands. I'm not even sure if they border hardcore or post-hardcore, but I can find out. They're myspace says rock, but myspace is not a viable source. I'll look to they're record lable and to AOL music to see what they say. And with what the record lable says, that's what we'll do reverts by how does that sound? Because we are looking for accuracy here, not what the fans or not fans think. Darthgriz98 17:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'd again suggest having what there record label, and music critics label as their main genre. And then having like influences, like I have added onto the page. Thanks for the quick reply! --DieHard2k5 18:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Here's some of what I found, [2], names them as hardcore but the front page names them as emo, screamo, and pop-punk. MTV says punk and alternative. They're website nothing, the record lable site, nothing. Now we can't just go by what the fans want or don't want because this is an encyclopedia. Darthgriz98 18:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, well going by that. I'd say that alternative rock with punk/emo/hardcore influences would fit it pretty well. Any additions? --DieHard2k5 18:23, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

nope, I think that will about do it, we just need to make sure it's all cited so we have cause to revert changes.Darthgriz98 18:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

All right, looks good. Here's my edit[[3]] I'd say that this should be good enough basis for revisions. --DieHard2k5 18:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

That looks good, if we get any weirdos/hardcore fans reverting putting this is gay emo ew so on so forth or het tbs is only harcore or punk we know what to revert now since we have the proof mwha! Good work! Darthgriz98 22:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

We're good to go then. Thanks for your help! --DieHard2k5 22:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Any time, now we just have to keep it that way. Darthgriz98 22:44, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Fall Out Boy

My mistake on the Pete Wentz thing, I honestly thought the links were spam - after reading the article, I see that it's not. The problem is that these band members - or at least most of them - are primarily notable for their links with the band. If you took the bandaway, would they be worthy of an article? HawkerTyphoon 02:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:P_Stump.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:P_Stump.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

The license was deleted with the anonymous vandalism about somebodies cousin. I replaced it as it was. --DieHard2k5 21:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. RexNL 21:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:TSO Band.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TSO Band.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{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 the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. --Chowbok ☠ 17:57, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

More replaceable fair use images

• Image:Tylerpr4.jpg

—Chowbok ☠ 23:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding reversions made Nov. 17 & 18 to Fall Out Boy

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

The duration of the block is 24 hours. Khoikhoi 00:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Diehard2k5 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

This makes no sense. I was reverting to keep a cited source in order. He was reverting unexplained. Certainly keeping cited information correct is not blockworthy. Would it not be? Also, by your actions, Godlord2, should be blocked as well.

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Even if the content was justified, it is not a good idea to edit war. You should discuss it on the talk page instead. Godlord2 did not break the 3RR. Khoikhoi 04:48, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Ryan Ross 29.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ryan Ross 29.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Ryan Ross 29.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ryan Ross 29.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{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 the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Chowbok ☠ 23:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Ryan Ross 29.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ryan Ross 29.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Abu Badali 03:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Falloutboy.jpg

Hi there, I just wanted to let you know that I've restored the {{Replaceable fair use}} template to Image:Falloutboy.jpg since it should remain there until an admin has reviewed it and decided it to be replaceable or not. —ShadowHalo 03:37, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm assuming that User:Diehard2k5 is you (correct me if I'm mistaken). The new image that you used does not allow commercial use or derivative works, which goes against Wikipedia's GFDL license, so the image you uploaded to the Commons will likely be deleted. However, if you send a message to the Flickr user asking that they release it under just the Attribution 2.0, which does allow commercial use and derivative works, then it can be used. (I have an account on Flickr, so if you'd like, I can send him/her the message.) Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. —ShadowHalo 08:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I've sent him a message, and I'll keep you updated if I here back from him. If he changes the license but doesn't send me a message, I'll probably miss it, so you may want to bookmark the image. —ShadowHalo 19:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Taking Back Sunday

hello, i tried to make an edit and it changed back and you changed it last, it says you are in charge of keeping profiles in order, so could you tell me why you changed it back in case i did something wrong? if i did something wrong i certainly didnt mean too.

I do believe, along with many other TBS fans, that Taking Back Sunday is a grunge band due to their similarities to Nirvana, and I think the pic i tried to put up better represents that.

Sorry for any trouble, GrungeSkater —Preceding unsigned comment added by GrungeSkater (talk • contribs)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:PWentz TRL.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:PWentz TRL.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ~ BigrTex 20:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dancedance.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dancedance.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ~ BigrTex 20:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:List of media personalities who have vandalised Wikipedia

It looks like the deletion police are trying to circumvent a previous AFD again. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:List of media personalities who have vandalised Wikipedia. As you voted keep, could you cast your vote again? - Ta bu shi da yu 23:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:JTrohman.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:JTrohman.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Jkelly 02:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Tttygdc.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tttygdc.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images 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. (ESkog)^(Talk) 16:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:TracksOfTylerHilton.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:TracksOfTylerHilton.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:TylerHiltonEP.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:TylerHiltonEP.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:TylerHiltonLP.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:TylerHiltonLP.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:80s logo.jpg

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:80s logo.jpg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 18:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 18:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:LittleLessSixteenCandles.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:LittleLessSixteenCandles.jpg. 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. BetacommandBot 05:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Abby Morgan

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Abby Morgan, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Abby Morgan. Ejfetters 03:39, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Mitch Leery

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Mitch Leery, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Mitch Leery. Ejfetters 03:43, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Gail Leery

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Gail Leery, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Gail Leery. Ejfetters 03:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:That80sshowcast.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:That80sshowcast.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any 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. Issuecheck (talk) 01:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MyFriendLeonardLeonard.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:MyFriendLeonardLeonard.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)