User talk:Rocksey

Archives

Thom Bierdz and Phillip Chancellor III

Hi Rocksey. I work for the production company. Mr. Bierdz is back to play PCIII. I can't give too much away regarding the developing storyline but it will be revealed shortly that Thom Bierdz will assume his old role. Some history will be re-written. These items should appear in the mainstream press later this week. Watch for a few more "blasts from the past" to re-join the show in the coming months. Celtix7 (talk) 03:30, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Silly deletion nominations (of images)

I reported it under the title Deletion nominations of images valid within articles. Your involvement with some of these articles and especially with WP:SOAPS is perfectly valid to at least comment on. I would appreciate you lending your thoughts there about this matter. I feel that it would only help the case against mass deletion nominations such as these. Flyer22 (talk) 00:30, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ethan Lovett

Hey, thanks for your adds to the article ... by chance do your Soaps in Depth mags have anything on the actor Nathan Parsons himself? That article is also up for deletion ... Thanks again! — TAnthony^Talk 08:48, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, some of the articles have information on Parsons. I'm not sure what's important for an actor article so here are the scans [1], [2], and [3]. I'm still looking for sources for the Lovett article. I might have enough for a little bit of a reception section. Rocksey (talk) 20:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stacy Haiduk as Patty Williams.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Stacy Haiduk as Patty Williams.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Peripitus (Talk) 06:33, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chloe Mitchell

Let me know if you object to any new main image I upload of her. I am not fond of the current main image in her article, and feel that it is a little too cutesy to represent a vixen (that outfit in particular); I feel the same about the current Greenlee Smythe image (and have felt that way about that Greenlee image since it has been up there). Flyer22 (talk) 04:09, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any objection to a new image for the article. Why do you have a problem with the image of Greenlee Smythe? Rocksey (talk) 04:13, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too cutesy, like I stated above, LOL. Another editor felt the same way about it, as seen in my #3 archive about that image.

As for the Chloe image, I felt you would not necessarily object to the idea of a new image...but may object to a particular image (as in however the image looks, of course). If you do not like any new main image I upload for Chloe, I am just saying let me know; I would definitely be okay with compromising. That goes for any television-related article we have both been involved in. Flyer22 (talk) 04:56, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I always thought it depicted all of the different sides of the character (strong, independent, sassy, girly) well.

As for the Chloe Mitchel image, I'll let you know if I have any objections to it. Rocksey (talk) 06:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. And since you like the current Greenlee image, I could ask you your opinion on any image I am thinking of replacing it with, if you would like. Flyer22 (talk) 07:09, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Spencer and Laura Webber, Part 2

So...do you want to start fixing up that article now, since it is up for deletion? Or wait and see how the deletion debate goes first; if it is deleted, simply recreate it (without all that plot, of course) and fix it up then? Flyer22 (talk) 16:44, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been removed from the deletion debate upon request, but it is probably best that we start fixing up that article really soon. There are other articles I have been focused on lately, and I know the same goes for you, but this article needs our focus more. Flyer22 (talk) 17:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. We really need to get on this. I've gathered a good deal of information on the creation and writing of the couple, so I can start on that and hopefully have something written up in a day or so. Rocksey (talk) 18:26, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good. I will pitch in when I get a good chance to. Right now, I am about to add more to the Supercouple article article, and tweak it some more, before someone tries again to take that article down (no matter the plenty of reliable sources in it backing things up). Flyer22 (talk) 19:02, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have started on the article. It is tricky to add to the Writing section without knowing what you are typing up/going to add to it, so I only started that off with a little bit. The Cultural impact section has more. I will let you focus on the Writing section for now, and I will add to it after seeing your additions. In the meantime, I may focus more on the Cultural impact section. When AniMate gets back from his vacation, I plan to ask him if he would not mind cutting down on the article's plot; he is most definitely good at trimming plot sections. We would have three different editors focusing on three different parts of the article, which is good and may make this process go faster. Flyer22 (talk) 08:24, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks great! I'm sorry I'm taking so long in getting my stuff together. I'll definitely have it up tonight. I'm thinking the rape will need it's own subsection inside of Writing. Rocksey (talk) 19:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I should be the one apologizing for having taken so long to fix up this article after having been the one to ask you to collaborate on it with me and when you were ready months ago. Flyer22 (talk) 23:04, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good work on the Writing section, as expected, even though I know you have a lot more to add to it (if you are planning on having a subsection about the rape, as you indicated above). I, of course, have a lot more to add to the Cultural impact section. I went ahead and asked AniMate about trimming the plot section, since he is currently editing Wikipedia a little bit while on vacation. Flyer22 (talk) 00:50, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm still going back and forth on how to format it all. There is information on the rape which could go in the writing and some that could go in the reception, so I'm not sure if they should all go in the same place or if I should split it up between the writing and the reception. I also wish I could find more on the times General Hospital revisited the rape with first Lucky and then Lulu. Rocksey (talk) 04:36, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that some of it is about the reception of the rape, I would say they should definitely be split up. You certainly would not be in my way in the Cultural impact section, of course. We are working on all this together; it is just that, individually, we are currently focusing more on different parts of the article. Flyer22 (talk) 20:48, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Logan family

Hey Rocksey, I agree with you, I was just shocked that all of them were gone. But anyway, most of the articles for Bold and the Beautiful were strictly plot, and most of the plot overviews did not need to be included. Hopefully in the future, some of these characters can get articles with more expansion that just the plot. Thanks. 98.104.165.68 (talk) 01:12, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

::ee my comment on the talk p. there.    DGG ( talk ) 16:58, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jerica

IN this suppage of mine User:BigPadresDUDE/Workspace/Article im currently working on a article for jerica jackson montgomery and erica kane of amc would you help me get it ready for the mainstage? Big Padres Dude 22:27, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how much help I can be because I generally don't watch anything having to do with Jackson. Here are some sources on the topic that could be of use: [4], [5] [6] [7] [8]. Rocksey (talk) 18:38, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thanks and how am i doing on this article? im trying to get it to ga once it hits the mainstay you know any amc experts? that can help me write the article? Big Padres Dude 01:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I finally got a chance to really look over the article and it has a lot of issues with grammer and the lack of sources. Also, most of the casting section looks like it's just copied from the Background and Castings sections in the Erica Kane article. It's redundant to have basically just the exact same thing in both articles. It's probably fine to mention it a little, but not just to copy and reword what's in the other article. With sources, you don't just paste a link in and call it a source. Here's some info to read up on with sourcing: Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:Citation templates.

Also, articles have to be about notable subjects. Do you think you can establish notability with this couple article that would meet the Wikipedia:Notability guidelines? If not, it might be best just to elaborate more about this pairing in either the Erica Kane article or the Jackson Montgomery one.

On a side note, what are your plans at improving the Brooke Logan article?Rocksey (talk) 18:40, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

please participate in this discussion Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Soap_Operas#Criteria_For_A_Characters_Page thanks Big Padres Dude 23:00, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Template:The Young and the Restless. While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2009 (UTC) Toddst1 (talk) 04:02, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tammin Sursok recurring

Why do you keep insisting that Sursok is not on recurring when I have shown you concrete evidence that she is? She was listed as recurring in this week and last week's closing credits and if that isn't a credible source, nothing is. Kogsquinge (talk) 07:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note

We may not need to worry about this, but our friends at Wikia have tried to import an article to Wikipedia.Here's the deets. AniMate^draw 01:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Newman Enterprises

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Newman Enterprises. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newman Enterprises. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Greenlee Smythe#The recurring themes of the character line

I know that you may have seen this discussion, but I am asking do you mind commenting on it? If you would rather not, that is fine (of course). I just feel that your opinion on the matter will be helpful. Flyer22 (talk) 23:53, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colleen Carlton

I saw that you changed the tense back stating that the character is still fictional which is obvious and it's really not a big deal, but my question is shouldn't it be in the past tense since the character no longer exist anymore even in the fictional world. Several of the profiles I've encountered of past characters on different soap operas write them in the past tense because the character is no longer on the scene so I thought that was the way it's supposed to be done. I mean it only makes sense to me but like I said no big deal I was just wondering the reasoning behind putting the profile back in present tense when the character no longer exists in the present on the show. Just thought I'd ask before changing anything again.Sparrowhawk7 (talk) 03:22, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I should have given a clearer explanation for why I made the change. I switched the line back to "Colleen Carlton is a fictional character from the American soap opera The Young and the Restless" because even if a character dies within the story and stops appearing on the series, they are still a part of that series. Colleen Carlton is still a character from this soap opera. This is done with other articles as well. For instance, the article for the Star Wars character Padmé Amidala still begins similarly because, despite the characters death, she is still a part of that series. It's the same for the Gone With the Wind character Melanie Hamilton and the Desperate Housewives character Edie Britt. Rocksey (talk) 06:22, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks for the information, it's just that in my experience with several of the General Hospital characters, once the characters no longer exists in the present on the show, their profile is changed to was and it is like that on almost every single past characters page. If you look at this page List of General Hospital miscellaneous characters you will come across several deceased characters whose profile begins with 'was' because they are no longer a part of the series present show, so that was mainly what made it confusing for me. I understand them still being a part of the series but they are a part of the series' past, and not the present. I don't know it just seems weird to me, but I can see how it would be correct. So thanks for the information and I will leave it as it is. Sparrowhawk7 (talk) 04:37, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

Have fun, Rocksey. Flyer22 (talk) 17:38, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Flyer. I hope you had a good holiday. Rocksey (talk) 06:49, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recasting Bianca Montgomery?

What do you make of it? I just commented on it on my talk page. Flyer22 (talk) 20:54, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abby Carlton/Newman

However, of course all of the sources concerning Hayley Erin will be Carlton because that was the character's name during her stint. Marcy Rylan was specifically credited as Abby Newman in the closing credits of Wednesday's episode, and I am attempting to find a verifiable source for it. Candyo32 (talk) 00:07, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The media with Marcy Rylan also points to the name Abby Carlton. I'll add a few more sources in a minute. Even though the series is changing the character's name, the common name, or name that the character is most recognizable as, is Abby Carlton. That may change in the future, but we don't know that. Rocksey (talk) 00:15, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brenda Dickson

Your best bet is going to be the library. Unfortunately, alot of the press from back then hasn't made it onto the internet, and what has is usually hidden in a pay archived site. Good old fashioned microfiche is probably your best bet. There was an E! True Hollywood special on Y&R that had some information as well. Google News archive is usually a great starting point to figure out what articles you need, and if they're not available on line, you can know exactly what you need at the library. AniMate 23:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks AniMate! Rocksey (talk) 01:03, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IP adding infobox soap character 2/sandbox to all soap opera articles

Needs reverting. Infobox soap character 2/sandbox isn't all that different, but it describes the relationships as "Family." Not all of those relationships are family. I would go around and revert all of his or her edits myself, but sigh. I'll take care of it gradually. Flyer22 (talk) 04:49, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The IP has different IP addresses, by the way. And Infobox soap character 2/sandbox adds the much debated age field back. Flyer22 (talk) 12:59, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hayley Erin as Abby Carlton.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hayley Erin as Abby Carlton.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some help

Hey, Rocksey, will you help me keep an eye on Victor Lord Jr.? I redirected it to Todd Manning, because it documents a non-notable character who is known as Todd Manning for most of his time on the series. But it was recently recreated, and I had to revert again.

I would also appreciate some help in watching the Supercouple and List of fictional supercouples articles (especially the latter)...if you aren't already still watching them and don't mind. Flyer22 (talk) 20:02, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind about Victor Lord Jr. An IP took my advice in the edit history and redirected it to One Life to Live miscellaneous characters. Still, it has yet to be revealed which of the two is the real Todd...and the IP's version currently calls St. John the fake Todd. Flyer22 (talk) 20:32, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you don't still want me to watch Victor Lord Jr.? It looks like the article was recreated again. Rocksey (talk) 01:50, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's semi-protected right now, but an extra pair of eyes on it wouldn't hurt. So thank you. And for more on this problem since "the real Todd" reveal, you can see User talk:5 albert square/Archive 11#Téa Delgado, User talk:Raintheone#Help and Talk:Todd Manning#Separate articles. You may have already seen the latter. Flyer22 (talk) 23:26, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tucker McCall

Tucker is one of the main characters on the show. How can you consider him in the list of minor characters? He should have his own page like the other main characters do. Colton hockey11 (talk) 19:06, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Soap Operas alert

As a member of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Soap Operas, and in accordance with the appropriate notification in deference to canvassing, I am alerting your attention to several current discussions for deletion pertaining to soap opera characters. This is an invitation to participate in the discussion. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 20:24, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Rocksey. About your comment here, you are seriously saying that there are no "outside sources" for Brooke English and Myrtle Fargate after the sources that were provided for them in the discussion? I issued a "Keep" for those two.[9] Flyer22 (talk) 20:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Flyer. Yes, I was serious. Those "articles" don't meet the standards for notability. As they are, they're just plot, like way too many of the articles in this project. Rocksey (talk) 06:58, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We aren't supposed to judge whether or not a topic is notable based on the current state of its article. That is the mistake the nominator is making and has gotten criticized for. We are supposed to judge these topics on whether or not reliable third-party sources can be provided to establish notability for them. And from what I have seen, there can be, at least for Brooke English. The administrator who closed the AfD also saw some notability for Brooke English. On further examination, it seems the Google Books sources mentioning Myrtle Fargate are just mentions. Single lines mentioning her name. I'd have to read through those books to see if they actually discuss the character in detail. Flyer22 (talk) 20:04, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I look forward to seeing you or another editor clean up those articles ;) Rocksey (talk) 05:41, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hayley Erin as Abby Carlton.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hayley Erin as Abby Carlton.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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:52, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Lavery article

I know that you care about this character, or least his relationship with Greenlee Smythe, so maybe you would be willing to significantly fix up this article before George Ho (who was recently unblocked) nominates it for deletion? Even if you cannot provide a lot of outside notability, just fixing it up would of course be a huge plus. Flyer22 (talk) 22:17, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I can look around to see what I can find on him. Rocksey (talk) 00:13, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:EG117.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:EG117.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. George Ho (talk) 18:30, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk Back

Hello, Rocksey. You have new messages at Musicfreak7676's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Orphaned non-free image File:Stacy Haiduk as Patty Williams.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Stacy Haiduk as Patty Williams.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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have questions, please post them here.
I will automatically remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please ask an admin to turn it off here.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 01:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Edfirstwedding.jpg

While the Erica and Dimitri wedding photo is more substantial, this is co-owned by the Getty Images. No matter the size, distribution type, and rationale, WP:NFCC#2 is violated, and prior publication does not invalidate a reason to delete this image. I wonder if you know any other photos that do not currently co-belong to the Getty. --George Ho (talk) 02:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thad and Adrianne mid-show promo 2006.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Thad and Adrianne mid-show promo 2006.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Sven Manguard Wha? 20:02, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thad and Adrianne mid-show promo 2006.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Thad and Adrianne mid-show promo 2006.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Sven Manguard Wha? 19:49, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hayley Erin as Abby Carlton.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hayley Erin as Abby Carlton.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Stefan2 (talk) 13:42, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Hayley Erin as Abby Carlton.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hayley Erin as Abby Carlton.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:19, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All My Children and One Life to Live help

I was wondering since someone created the List of characters from Y&R from 1970s to 2010s, can you help me with this? Thanks! Jester66 (talk) 06:46, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Lilywinters2006.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Lilywinters2006.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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:01, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA reassessment

Hello there. I am not sure if you are still active on Wikipedia given your contribution history, however, I see that you were a prime contributor to Dimitri Marick during its process to become a good article in March 2009. Unfortunately, its current state does not meet the good article criteria, and I have nominated it for a community reassessment. Should you come across this message, your opinion would be gladly appreciated at the discussion here. Thank you! Regards, Creativity97 22:06, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Rocksey. Judging by this, I obviously disagree with the WP:GA reassessment of this article. Flyer22 (talk) 23:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion has been closed now. Thanks anyway! Creativity97 15:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:DMAR21.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:DMAR21.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 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:06, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ReeseproposestoBianca.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ReeseproposestoBianca.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) 02:34, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:EdenandTamara.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:EdenandTamara.gif. 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) 17:29, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]