User talk:Tdl1060/Archive 1

Patrick O'Malley

Patrick O'Malley is a Chicago politician, because as a state senator, he represented a portion of the city of Chicago. 75.2.243.187 06:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Roskam

Could you please discuss the issue on the talk page rather than engaging in edit war? — goethean ॐ 16:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Tim Walberg

• Please don't remove tags without either sourcing the article better or discussing on the Talk Page.--Isotope23 12:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Kevin Edward White

This was a non-notable biography as per the criteria set out in WP:BIO. (aeropagitica) 21:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Bill Mitchell

User Tdl1060 has deleted information about Illinois State Bill Mitchell's August 29, 2003 DUI arrest. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Mjv111 (talk • contribs)

In answer to your question, I removed the information on Bill Mitchell (politician) earlier because you had not cited sources. --Tdl1060 17:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

TPM as a source

You were probably right to remove that, but IMO for the wrong reason (namely, that it was superfluous to the article ... the earlier effusion is all that matters, and it came direct from the source). Per this discussion, I tend to feel that TPM, which is run somewhat like a regular media outlet by a a notable individual whose work has been published elsewhere before his blogging, and which regularly cites its other sources, can be considered reliable. Daniel Case 02:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Roskam

I suggest that you do not endorse the edits of indefinitely blocked users such as you did here. — goethean ॐ 16:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Ramsey, Godsey, Davis, Mumpower

RE: Ron Ramsey, Steve Godsey, David Davis (Tennessee politician), Jason Mumpower >>>Your post at User talk:4.88.70.24"Could you please discuss the issue rather than engaging in edit war?--Tdl1060 18:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)"

Tdl1060, seeing how this is your first post to Talk before repeatedly deleting revelant information pertaining to several politicians from Northeast Tennessee and their ties to prominent pharmaceutical businesses (e.g. King and Leitner Pharma, or SJ Strategic Investments) located within their own counties (i.e.: Sullivan County) and districts (1st U.S. House of Representatives District, Tennessee) , I would be glad to discuss the issue with someone from Illinois as you appear to be.

While your user page indicates that you take some pride in having "...over a ton of edits", I think that your hacking through the section "Political connection to Altace, pharmaceutical industry" the wikipages for Ron Ramsey et al is completely unwarrented. You might have noticed that these individuals are politicians and that the materials that you repeatedly removed from their individual pages provided the details of those stated specific connections to both Altace and the repsective pharma businesses.

And while you are suggesting that you cuts would be better suited at pharma pages, you neglected to make the good-faith editing step by seeing that the information and references that you had repeatedly deleted were actually posted to those pages that you suggested while making your edits.

I do not believe that your repeated edits at these pages can be attributed to any action other than vandalism.

<hl>

That's fine that the info is already on the articles on the pharmaceuticals but if the readers want to see more backround on them all the need to do is click on the links. Wikipedia can't have the backround of every issue or company exhaustively layed out on an article in which it may be mentioned, that's what internal links are for.--Tdl1060 19:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

And four paragraphs of material constitutes a "exhaustively layed out" issue background by Wiki standards? Prove it...4.129.65.207 19:27, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Please stay on the above clown who wants to link the entire history of King Pharma and Altace to anyone who has ever received a political contribution from them. Bet that he is the sort of guy who would just flip if anyone linked Kenneth Lay to Bill or Hillary Clinton, even though he spent the night in the Lincoln Bedroom while he/she/they were President. 68.53.110.123 22:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Why the changes to the Jim Whitehead entry?

I am his son-in-law. The text of the bio came directly from Joel McElhannon, his campaign manager. It looks like you left out a lot of information. I'm trying to thumb through the differences. We would appreciate the original text and picture being put back the way it was. If there is some copyright violation we have invoked, please point it out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kepper (talk • contribs) 15:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

Hmm.

So, in your world, is there only one John Gard? Or could you actually acknowledge that there is more than one, and leave up the disambiguation page? --Marmoset Marmalade 20:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Stay off my talk page

Wondering why you keep threatening me with blocking.Your assertion that my edits are vandalism are POV.Are you even an agent of Wikipedia at any level?Your defense of the cristophile Musgrave is not my problem.Don't make it others either--Thatpeteguy 21:11, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

DePauw v. DePaul

Why do you keep changing DePauw University which is the school in Greencastle, IN that Joe Vosicky attended back to DePaul. DePaul University is in Chicago, not Greencastle, Indiana, silly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.74.152.136 (talk) 03:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC).

Smith Watch is highly researched, with the articles sourced. Just like the other watchdog sites listed. The site is linked to by Dailykos, the UNO Democrats and the Nebraska Democratic party blogsite.

Bushy

I would like you to look again at Bushy and reconsider your vote. I have rewritten the article from scratch using reliable sources. Thanks! --Dhartung | Talk 09:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Warning

Hey. On the Illinois 2008 Senate Election, some non-member added what I call "complete vandalism". I have looked up the lady he put down to be running against Durbin, and have not found a thing. The at the bottom, he put, " support this lady, against Dick Durbin". Is there any possible way he can be blocked?

Politics rule 21:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Barbara Cubin

User Tdl1060 is deleting information regarding Barbara Cubin's political career - from what I can see, they are quotes properly sourced with regards to a relevant topic. Instead of editing and undoing edits please utilize the talk page.

reply: I left an edit summary explaining each of the edits, one of the texts I removed was still tagged as unsourced, the other was commentary from an obviosly biased source.--Tdl1060 17:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Mike Erickson

Mike Erickson has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt this person might not be notable enough for an article. Please review Wikipedia:Notability (people) for the relevant guidelines. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the "prod" template, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod template, the article will not be deleted, but if an editor is still not satisfied that it meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. NickelShoe (Talk) 03:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Renee Kosel

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Renee Kosel, by LyonsTwp,IL., another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Renee Kosel seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Renee Kosel, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Renee Kosel itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 20:02, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Remove election categories on Rosemarie Panio

Hey, thanks for bringing that to my attention. The only reason I added the article was because I noticed that the '97 and '99 categories had two articles and had a 'please populate this category' tag. Is there anywhere I can find that specifically says what a category is for? I've had a few other editors mention I have been incorrectly tagging my articles so if there is some kind of resource other then the discussion tab, please let me know. Thanks! MrPrada 20:41, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

re: Elections in the United States categories

OK, thanks. One other question--since the articles have a request to be populated, would this include articles with nested election results (for instance, New York gubernatorial elections‎), or do they have to be specific election articles? MrPrada 01:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh really?

• "...has used its company to smuggle cocaine into other countries. It has been known to help people become drug addicts. Many of its legitmate products have also been overpriced to support the company in its illegal actitvites across the globe. Be warned it has smuggled guns and other weapons into..."
• rv. content is unsourced

That's a very droll edit summary. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 08:07, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Words to Avoid

I didn't know 'claim' was a word to avoid until someone pointed it out to me. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Words_to_avoid Jmegill 13:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for getting the Huckabee gas tax thing right. I knew that that information was wrong on there, but I couldn't change it because the wrong information had reliable sources and I would just get into an edit war. Jmegill 13:59, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Ruth Johnson

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ruth Johnson, 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 explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest 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 endorse 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 the page. Doc^g 22:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Mike Huckabee Merge Proposal

Please comment on merging Mike Huckabee controversies into Mike Huckabee here [[1]] Jmegill (talk) 09:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Obi Sium

I have nominated Obi Sium, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obi Sium. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Blueboy96 16:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Harris

if saying the first district is not traditionally and geographically the first district, then you need to delete/cite a crapload of info on the first district entry, the delmarva peninsula, the eastern shore, etc....info that has stood ok on wikipedia for years. WillC (talk) 19:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Chris Peden

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Chris Peden, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 13:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Elections talk

Please join the discussion at Talk:United States House of Representatives elections, 2008#Charts.—Markles 16:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Tom McClintock

Hello Tdl1060. Thank you for cleaning up the McClintock article by removing the recent news from the article opening. I think that it should be included though. I have added a section titled Controversy further down in the article. If you have ideas on how to make the section better, please feel free to change it or discuss it with me in the article talk page. Thank you. JBFrenchhorn (talk) 23:40, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Robert Belin

An article that you have been involved in editing, Robert Belin, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Belin. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Powers ^T 13:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Chris Peden

I have nominated Chris Peden, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Peden. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 04:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Chris Hackett (politician)

I have nominated Chris Hackett (politician), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Hackett (politician). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Blueboy96 21:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Notability of David Magnum

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on David Magnum, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because David Magnum seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting David Magnum, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 19:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Political bias, POV

A quick look at your "contribs" here on the Wikipedia reveals in an instant that your Wikipedia account exists solely to make edits that are biased politically. These acts by their very nature are POV and run counter to the rules by which the Wikipedia is run.

If your interest is to politicize the Wikipedia to push certain points of view, I suggest you find something else to do. --AStanhope (talk) 22:11, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

First of all, not all of my edits have even been to politically related articles, secondly, all I have done to the Van Jones is remove left-wing bias. I have not added any biased content to Wikipedia, but notwithstanding your whole argument is hypocritical as your own edits, and comments on discussion pages have revealed your own political biases. --Tdl1060 (talk) 22:37, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Wrong answer. --AStanhope (talk) 23:14, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jim Dodge (Illinois)

The article Jim Dodge (Illinois) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Election candidate with no evidence of notability. Only reference is his own material.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 05:59, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Tdl1060! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 10 of the articles that you created are Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 943 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Allen McCulloch - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Mike DeNunzio - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. John Dendahl - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
4. Kenneth G. McMillan - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
5. Jeff Richey - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
6. John Waterman - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
7. Joe Zakas - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
8. Dale Risinger - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
9. Robbie Rudolph - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
10. Robert Gerald Lorge - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:47, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

February 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions, including your edits to Debra Medina (politician). However, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article, or any other Wikipedia page, must include proper sources. Thank you. —DoRD (?) (talk) 19:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

"Voting with the Democrats"

Please define "voting with the Democrats" in the many House members' articles you've added it, or the equivalent, to. It's more objective and accurate to say "voting with a majority of his/her Democratic colleagues," which is what the statistic refers to. And calling it the "Democrat Party" as you did in the John Spratt article is POV in and of itself. The correct name is "Democratic." JTRH (talk) 16:06, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Just saw your latest change to the Spratt article. It's fine. Thanks. JTRH (talk) 16:26, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Your edits with "voting with the Democrats" are painfully clearly only to target politically vulnerable Democrats in the midterm elections by making them sound bad. Either you very magically happened to only edit pages of a limited number of Democrats - all of who are likely to face tough re-election, in a massive coincidence - or you purposefully did so. If you don't add something similar to the page of every current Democratic and Republican politician, I will remove the edits you have made about party-line statistics, because it can't be any more obvious that you're not doing it in good faith or because you believe it's information that'd be good to have on every politician's page. This isn't because I'm defending the Democrats, I think they're horrible and I have nothing to gain from defending them. So either be principled and do this for every member of Congress or undo your targeted and politically motivated edits, or I will, and if the admins find this unreasonable they can feel free to suspend or ban me. Kelseypedia (talk) 18:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I did not add the voting record statistics to all vulnerable Democrats. What I was intending to do was simply add balance and context to pages that gave undo weight to votes where the member of congress deviated from the party line, by showing the true percentage of the time when that member voted with their party. If you checked, each article that I edited lists votes, or positions that the member of congress took that was contrary to the party line. And by the way WP:AGF. --Tdl1060 (talk) 03:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

This is again, some mystical thinking. Either you checked every single page of every member of Congress and only added it to Democrats, because all the Republican pages accurately represented their vote count, or ????. Your reasoning is nonsensical and inconsistent and it's extraordinarily hard for me to assume good faith given the circumstances. If you don't revert them or add it to every other page of every other member of Congress, then I will. Kelseypedia (talk) 08:22, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Show me where it says that in order to edit one page, that I must check every other related page and make sure that the same content is present in all other pages. There is nothing biased about what I added, and it is properly sourced. All that I have done is provide context, and balance where it is lacking. As I have previously stated the only articles that I added the party-line voting statistics were ones that gave undo weight to specific votes or positions. You have yet to show me any policy that I have violated. You on the other hand have violated WP:AGF, and if you followed through on your threat WP:EWIS.--Tdl1060 (talk) 17:51, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

"An editor gaming the system is seeking to use policies with bad faith, by finding within their wording apparent justification for disruptive actions and stances that policy is clearly not at all intended to support. In doing this, the gamester separates policies and guidelines from their rightful place as a means of documenting community consensus, and attempts to use them selectively for a personal agenda.

Sometimes gaming the system is used to make a point. Other times, it is used for edit warring, or to enforce a specific non-neutral point of view. In all of these, gaming the system is an improper use of policy and is forbidden. An appeal to policy which does not further the true intent and principle of the policy is an improper use of that policy."

So let me ask you again: you edit the pages of about a dozen vulnerable Democrats to say how much they voted with the Democrats in order to show some "balance" - something you did not find lacking in ANY Republican articles or non-vulnerable Democratic articles, and it's just a massive coincidence. Also "in this context" is meaningless. What context? What do you mean? How? What does it add? What "balance" was lacking?

You're attempting to distract from the issue by demanding I show where you must edit every other page similarly because I never purported that you had to do such a thing, I asked why you didn't do it if it was really to make constructive edits. This is a question you have repeatedly dodged.

Your attempts to strictly follow tangible policies is also laughable because you have not demonstrated a single viable reason for these ultra-specific changes other than "to show balance in this context" - this is meaningless, and you haven't explained it. Even if you could, I will again ask how it cannot be applied to the page of every member of Congress, and while you can fuss all you want about there being no rule requiring you to make egalitarian changes, in the context of adding in information that makes members of a political party in vulnerable spots look bad, it's going to be painfully obvious why you made that series of edits. Kelseypedia (talk) 21:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

First you asked "what balance was lacking". This question I have already answered by stating that the articles that I added the statistics in question to, gave undo weight to certain votes or positions. Your claim that I only added the party line voting statistics to vulnerable Democrats does not hold water either, because no-one currently views Dan Boren as being vulnerable. Finally, if you feel that there is a congressperson's article that gives undo weight to certain votes or positions, that you believe could be balanced by adding party line voting statistics, you are free to add them as well. Otherwise you have proven that you have no case to complain about the edits in question.--Tdl1060 (talk) 02:40, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

You have not told me your metric for doing so. It's not "undue" weight to state a politician's position on major legislation. That's called "notability." Wikipedia is not a news organization, and your own opinion of "balance" of facts is completely irrelevant. I don't feel undue weight is given to major votes, because that's why they're major votes. I'm going to undo your edits and if an admin wants to step in, I welcome that, because this is preposterous. Kelseypedia (talk) 08:38, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your work on Paul Ryan (politician)‎! I was trying to keep biased stuff out but I was having a hard time telling what was what. Daniel J Simanek (talk) 00:03, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jeff Richey‎

The article Jeff Richey‎ has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --GRuban (talk) 20:37, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of WFAV

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on WFAV requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia 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. Mr. R00t ^{Contact me} 00:13, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nick Reid (politician)

The article Nick Reid (politician) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I'm not finding significant coverage in reliable sources that would demonstrate notability per WP:BIO. This person fails WP:POLITICIAN as an unelected former candidate.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 13:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums#Polling

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums#Polling. —Markles 16:21, 21 July 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

Speedy deletion nomination of Allen McCulloch

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 Allen McCulloch 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 person or group of people, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. --Nuujinn (talk) 00:49, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Allen McCulloch for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Allen McCulloch, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allen McCulloch until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Mkativerata (talk) 01:27, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mickey Stumbaugh

The article Mickey Stumbaugh has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:POLITICIAN "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article."

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Proposed deletion of Ron Drake

The article Ron Drake has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:POLITICIAN "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article."

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Proposed deletion of Mike DeNunzio

The article Mike DeNunzio has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:POLITICIAN "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article."

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jerzeykydd (talk) 15:46, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mike DeNunzio

The article Mike DeNunzio has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:POLITICIAN "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article." (I've rePROD'd this to correct an error in the previous PROD template.)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. j⚛e decker^talk 17:08, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Wisconsin edits are under discussion, and you are entitled to have your say

See Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#User:Tdl1060 for the discussion. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:10, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Mistake at Jennifer Shilling

Your reversion at the Jennifer Shilling biography assumes that the reporter has Shilling opposing AB3 or AB4, the two bills that the article nominally discusses: "Walker signs 2 more business incentive bills". However, the article brings up a third bill, AB6, which is the one Shilling is said to have opposed. Your reversion is therefore inadequately referenced in regard to AB3 and AB4. Binksternet (talk) 02:03, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Sandy Pasch, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Do not withhold positive information for the purpose of making Pasch look bad. Do not present only negative aspects of complex issues. Binksternet (talk) 15:39, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

At Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#User:Tdl1060, you can see that editors such as myself have a problem with the lack of neutrality you have shown on Wikipedia. In general, your edits put Democrats in a negative light and Republicans in a positive light. All of the issues you bring to articles are ones that you spin in the direction of your preference even when there are complexities associated with it, or counterbalancing opinions. For instance, you wrote about the 2009 Doyle budget in a purely negative fashion, mentioning only the raised taxes, but the crisis budget has been described as answering the state's $5B or $6.6B shortfall, as a budget that made the deepest spending cuts in Wisconsin's history. The issue is complex, but you painted it black and showed only the black side to Wikipedia readers. Binksternet (talk) 16:13, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Joseph Sinagra

The article Joseph Sinagra has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable person. Fails WP:POLITICIAN: he was never elected to the House of Reps, and being on the council of a borough with a population of under 2,000 certainly does not satisfy criterion #2. All GNews hits are extremely trivial - a large number of them aren't even about him but rather about someone else with the same name. May also be a vanity page.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:13, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Votesmart

As you appear not to understand the definition of primary, secondary, and tertiary sources, please note the Wikipedia article on Tertiary sources 141.211.231.229 (talk) 23:42, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Joseph Sinagra for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph Sinagra is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Sinagra until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:29, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Cynthia Thielen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cynthia Thielen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cynthia Thielen until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Herp Derp (talk) 01:02, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

deleting unsourced claims

If a claim is insufficiently sourced from your perspective, you may tag it as "citation needed." After an amount of time (perhaps a day or two) as tagged for needing citation, without sufficient support, the claim will be deleted. In the case of a page with ten or fewer unique references, try reading the references for mention of the claim, you may be able to resolve the citation issue yourself. Deleting the work of another contributor is not contributory work and may lead to retaliation or edit wars. Let's all try to learn from this.

I found the cite needed in the Maine caucus page by reading the two articles referenced in that section (results). Each article had fewer than 400 words. It took me minutes. By the time I was done, you had deleted the "unsourced claim;" which had only received it's "citation needed" tag hours earlier. 50.132.91.194 (talk) 05:52, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Granted, but it only took me a couple of minutes to verify that the claim was wrong. There are no national delegates awarded directly from the state caucus, and if state delegates are elected at the local caucuses that will certainly affect the results. Not counting towards the non-binding straw poll announcement and not counting toward delegates are quite different. A claim made on an article which could depress voter turnout had better be accurate, and if it is not, it should be removed immediately, lest anyone be misled.--Tdl1060 (talk) 06:12, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of WHJG-LP

The article WHJG-LP has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This station does not seem to be notable. No Google news hits at all. Google web hits appear to be largely trivial, such as mentions on sites of the owning company, access sites to sign up to listen on line, directory sites that list this with many other stations, and other wikipedia pages. No independent sources cited in the article except to show its bare existence. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information nor a directory site.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DES ^(talk) 15:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of WHJG-LP for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article WHJG-LP is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WHJG-LP until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. DES ^(talk) 14:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. When you recently edited World Pulse Festival, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tait, Mark Schultz and Josh Wilson (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 04:49, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

NOAA Weather Station articles

I noticed a recent one of these you created and I see there's been some sporadic AfDs about them as well. As I'm sure you know, there are a few hundred (?) of these stations throughout North America and most of them I believe only broadcast computer-generated messages and are virtually identical, save for differences in location-based information. I'm of the opinion that these would be better handled with a single page listing all the NOAA weather radio stations, organized or split by region perhaps.

This would simplify maintenance, make vandalism less of an issue, and would provide context for people looking for them. I'd like to see if you're interested in such a merge. Shadowjams (talk) 22:27, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited WFTF, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rutland, Vermont (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

National Weather Service St. Louis, Missouri (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cedar Mountain

WCIC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to WICI

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:49, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating WLQI, Tdl1060!

Wikipedia editor Gareth E Kegg just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Great page. Carry on being awesome :)

To reply, leave a comment on Gareth E Kegg's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating WUZR, Tdl1060!

Wikipedia editor Gareth E Kegg just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Great work, keep up the awesome editing.

To reply, leave a comment on Gareth E Kegg's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

RE your proposed deletion of KGCU (a proposed Alaxka FM station)...

I received this (presumably) because in 2010 I contributed some historic information regarding AM radio station KGCU which was licensed to Mandan, North Dakota...and if memory serves correctly, it was intercepted by "Shadowjams" who kindly incorporated it with the listing for KLXX which is the current call sign license to the station that was formerly KGCU.

I have no knowledge of the "proposed" FM station with that call in Alaska, but can confirm that the information pertaining to both KGCU and KBOM within the KLXX page is accurate.

If you have any further questions, please let me know.

BTW, I am not a Wikipedia wizard...just an old radio guy who wanted to make sure that historic data pertaining to KGCU 1270 and KBOM 1270 in Mandan, ND (what little there is) will be retained somewhere.

In fact, I find much of the internal communication grid (like the section I'm in now) user-unfriendly, mysterious, and I'm never quite certain whether things are going where I hope they will or not.

You might find my personal web site interesting. http://home.comcast.net/~tjbdx/index.htm Also, I prefer to communicate via email, and if that's within Wikipedia rules, please contact me at tjbdx@comcast.net

Tom Bryant Tjbdxtjbdx (talk) 22:15, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Family Life Network, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Unadilla, New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Family Life Network, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Farmington Township, Pennsylvania (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating KVPI-FM, Tdl1060!

Wikipedia editor I dream of horses just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Nice stub!

To reply, leave a comment on I dream of horses's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating KVPI-FM, Tdl1060!

Wikipedia editor I dream of horses just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Nice stub!

To reply, leave a comment on I dream of horses's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

WQLF (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Classic Rock

WRHK (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Classic Rock

WWGO (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Classic Rock

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about KTMU

Hello, Tdl1060,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether KTMU should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KTMU .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Wikishagnik (talk) 06:35, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prime Time Begins at 7:30, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wheel of Fortune (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

KJEZ (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Classic Rock

KKID (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Classic Rock

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:54, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Radio station articles

Love the work you're doing on getting stubs created to fill in the holes in the coverage. If I could make a suggestion, it'd be great if you could also tag the talk pages for those new articles with the templates for the radio stations project and the applicable state project. Keep up the great work! Mlaffs (talk) 03:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I assume Mlaffs' is talking about W220DR, W290AZ and K207EB. I added the {{under construction}} template to the articles as it is preferred not to leave pages blank. If you are not going to expand them like the user above suggested, please re-redirect them or nominate them for deletion following policy (if needed.) Thank you for your contributions. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 06:12, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

These translators are not translators for the station indicated on the page, and these pages were redirecting to the page of a network that never existed. The translators are licensed and do exist, but until it can be established what station they are repeating, it is misleading to have a network that never existed, and that they never aired the content of, as the target article.--Tdl1060 (talk) 15:19, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Whatever actions you made/will make, are fine by me along as the pages do not get blanked. No explanation was needed. Thanks! :) -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 15:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Actually, the Under Construction templates are really no better than blank pages. It's not a template that is supposed to be the only thing on a page. So I've reverted to the long-standing redirects for now. Please do not let that stop you in any way from constructing new articles at those spots, just leave them as redirects until you are actually ready to write the new articles. - TexasAndroid (talk) 22:27, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

You are now autopatrolled

Hi Tdl1060, just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 02:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited KCEG, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bluegrass (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:34, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

File:WLBY station logo.PNG missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

• File:WLBY station logo.PNG

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 08:34, 14 April 2013 (UTC)