User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

1. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 1st year on Wikipedia
2. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 2nd year on Wikipedia
3. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 3rd year on Wikipedia
4. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 4th year on Wikipedia
5. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 5th year on Wikipedia
6. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 6th year on Wikipedia
7. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 7th year on Wikipedia
8. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 8th year on Wikipedia
9. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 9th year on Wikipedia
10. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 10th year on Wikipedia
11. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 11th year on Wikipedia
12. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 12th year on Wikipedia
13. User talk:Gibson Flying V/Archive 13th year on Wikipedia

Orphaned non-free image File:Mario Fenech What's Doing.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:51, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Offiah a blaze of glory.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:00, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Standing Tall The Tawera Nikau Story.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Standing Tall The Tawera Nikau Story.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item 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 creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media 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. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:22, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Crear

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Crear requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Berek (talk) 07:50, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Winfield Cup plus The Gladiators.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:31, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Wally lewis forever the king cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Wally lewis forever the king cover.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item 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 creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media 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. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:10, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Flags in European current templates

Hello there, I have been asked by another member of WPRL to widen the conversation on "Flags in European current templates", in the hope to gain a wider consensus. I imagine that this message may well never be read, dismissed, see me lose support, potentially gain some or take the discussion forwards. Please do take the time to read the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rugby_league#Flags_in_squad_templates if you can, but the crux of my position is that the flags are prevalent elsewhere, are consistent with usage by the MOS, and their implementation for their rugby league national squad/team or representative nationality, is in line with their intended purpose. The crux of the remove side would be an IP editor may interpret a flag as indication of birth, give too much credence to the nation, and the decision was made previously. To remove them from all rugby league templates when there is a limited conversation would seem more than a little unfair I would say, hence the attempt to reach out. I'm quite happy to voted down, but would appreciate a few more voices to the discussion, else it would seem quite wrong to move from the majority into the minority.Fleets (talk) 19:56, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Wayne Bennett dont die with the music in you.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Wayne Bennett dont die with the music in you.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item 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 creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media 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. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:03, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ruben Wiki Book Cover.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:09, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:SteveRenoufThePearl.jpg

⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:53, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Gibson Flying V. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Stuart Cummings

A tag has been placed on Stuart Cummings requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
• disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The-Pope (talk) 15:49, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Welcome back

Hope you're planning to stick around. Incidentally, I tried the SPI route not so long ago as well but it was a waste of time. I'm not sure what the admins are seeing that would give them any doubts to be honest... J Mo 101 (talk) 21:26, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, it's frustrating. But not all admins have doubts--Gibson Flying V (talk) 21:31, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Intro

I do not wish to get into an edit war, and I also feel that I should give you a platform to justify your changing of various introductions away from grammatical norms. I have looked into your view and cannot find this as consistent with any nations accepted use of English. I am obviously prepared to be proven wrong, but to edit war seems a waste of everyones time.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:43, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

You do wish to get into an edit war, at least that's what your edit history tells us. I don't believe for a second you've missed me repeatedly telling you The word "footballer" implies that he "played", rendering this a needless complication of the opening sentence. It's your mass changes to wording that's long-standing and widespread^{[1][2][3][4][5][6]} (probably because it's proper English) that awaits explanation. The above post tells us pretty much everything we need to know about your understanding of "grammatical norms". What a releif that you're "obviously prepared to be proven wrong". Have a good holiday.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 23:40, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

I'd seen it, and hence sought to engage, as it appears that we appear to have the opposite opinion on this matter, as I do not see it as complicated, needless or otherwise. Thanks all the same for responding though.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:53, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

This is too precious.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 01:30, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm glad it gave you a belly laugh; the request, the outcome or both. You can imagine the reasons behind it, but I will take the 3rd opinion on board, although I would have liked a little more than half a line as it didn't really address the whole matter. Yes a footballer plays, but that would be secondary to the sentence flow. Jack de Belin (born 17 March 1991) is an Australian professional rugby league footballer plays as a lock and prop for the St. George Illawarra Dragons in the NRL. Would that be acceptable? It would reduce the plays from 2 to 1 from my previous position, and flow much more smoothly in the first, and secondly it removes a short sentence by absorbing it into the first. Hopefully this is more than a compromise, but in fact a better way forwards.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:44, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

A player is a person who plays; a footballer is a player of football, that is a person who plays football. There's no reason to repeat the word "play". François Robere (talk) 12:23, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks for taking time to reply. I have used your position as potential for moving forwards constructively.Theanonymousentry (talk) 08:46, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Curran (surname) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Frank Curran, John Curran, Charles Curran, Kevin Curran, Robert Curran and Paul Curran

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Just a note

It's one thing to file an SPI against a suspected user, but when/if that SPI turns up negative you should cease to implicate the individual as a "known" sock. Consider this a courtesy note, and I hope to not see it again. Primefac (talk) 23:20, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, Primefac. But have you looked at the case? You can see that it's definitely User:Londo06, right? Or are you somehow more convinced by this than this? I can understand how it might look to someone unfamiliar. But, I mean, come on. It's all right there for anyone willing to take the time to look.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 23:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

I've dealt with plenty of users who absolutely 100% deny being involved in whatever led to their block (socking, UPE, etc); some are genuine and some aren't. The problem is that you "had your shot" - you filed an SPI and it didn't result in a definite connection. While I'm pretty sure Wikipedia doesn't have any sort of double jeopardy rules regarding socking or other offences, simply saying "you're a sock!" at every available opportunity does little to advancing your case. As I've found in other circumstances, the best thing is to quietly observe; if they really are socking they'll do something stupid and get caught - it happens all the time. Primefac (talk) 23:38, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

I 100% agree. I just wish the case would get more attention. So, I'm taking your reply as meaning you haven't had a look? It's time consuming, I understand. I did have my shot and he was blocked, but was later unblocked on a technicality regarding the closing admin's provision of evidence and the un-blocking admin's overly busy schedule.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 23:51, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

I can make no guarantees, but if I get an opportunity I'll give it a look. Primefac (talk) 18:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)