User talk:Denelson83/Archive page 11

Image:Radio_Canada_International.png

I have tagged Image:Radio_Canada_International.png as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Some examples can be found at Wikipedia:Use rationale examples. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 19:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC) [reply]

ZIP codes

I reverted again. The wikilink is to a non-existant article. Doesn't make sense to keep it. Maher-shalal-hashbaz (talk) 20:29, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need Assistance to Repost an Article Flagged For Speedy Deletion

Denelson83,

I am brand new with Wikipedia. On February 8, 2008, I posted an article for Reid Supply Company that had too many external links, was flagged as advertising and was speedily deleted before I understood how to use it. I corrected the problem with the Reid Supply Company submission and am ready to resubmit. How do I re-submit the information?

I tagged the submission with the "hangon" tag, but must have accidentally overwrote the new submission. I tried contacting KurtRaschke who originally flagged my article for deletion, but have not received a response since early February. Your contact information was also associated with the speedy deletion, so I am now contacting you.

Please let me know what I need to do to "unblock" Reid Supply Company and repost a more Wikipedia-friendly submission.

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Gpalmer7 (talk) 15:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)Gpalmer7[reply]

Thanks and A Few More Questions

Denelson83,

Thank you for the tip about resubmitting the Reid Supply Company article. I'll give it a try when I'm finished editing it. I tried to resubmit it before, but I got the message "You are editing a deleted page" warning.

Where can I find the code to create a company block like on the W.W. Grainger page? My article is complete, but I would like to have a company block with internal links (Slogan, Year, Type) and external link to our web site. I would also like to know how to create the section headers (See Also, References, External Links). I have been searching on Wikipedia, but haven't been able to find the information I'm looking for.

Thank you for your assistance.

Gpalmer7 (talk) 18:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)GPalmer7[reply]

Reid Supply Company

Denelson83,

OK, about this conflict of interest thing....how do you suppose Grainger, MSC, McMaster-Carr or any other company gets their information with propriary logos on Wikipedia? You can't tell me that the general public out of the goodness of their hearts are going to do company research, pull propietary logos and information and post it on Wiki. If they didn't post the information themselves, they hired and paid a third party to do it. From what I've heard, that's how the game is played.

Reid Supply Company has been in business for 60 years and I was trying to present that information on Wiki. I made the initial mistake of having the original article more of a marketing piece instead of information. I re-wrote it with facts, no marketing copy. If I can't post information about Reid Supply, can I send you the information as an unbiased person and you post it? I can assure you that the information is accurate.

Gpalmer7 (talk) 17:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC)gpalmer7[reply]

Re: Panamax - "dubious!"?

Hi. I'm just wondering in what way is that dab dubious in any way? Panamax is a brand of generic pain relief medication popular within the Asia/Pacific region (ie. Australia). Given that referencing a dab is nothing short of ridiculous, I'd like to know how a user searching for the effects of "Panamax" (let's assume they don't understand "paracetomol") is going to get there from a page about shipping widths? Dab'ing brands when another article by the same name exists is not uncommon. If you feel that this is a rather irrelevant dab, then please be more specific in an edit summary than a term such as "dubious" - expand on your reasoning. Thanks. SMC (talk) 12:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WP:MFD/Alkivar

I've been out of the loop for a couple of weeks, but I'd like to apologize wholeheartedly for sending you into that buzz-saw. When I asked you to post that request for me, I did it because I was afraid that a newbie non-admin posting such a request might not be taken as seriously. I did not realize that Alkivar apparently still bears the unconditional and unquestioning support of a number of senior admins on Wikipedia. Based on the policy statement from WP:USER which I cut-and-pasted into the MFD, I could not comprehend how anyone would begrudge me my request to remove the most pointedly offensive parts. As I said, I was unaware, and I'm sorry. Bullzeye^{(Ring for Service)} 01:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Typo redirect ZIP:00601

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on ZIP:00601, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because ZIP:00601 is a redirect page resulting from an implausible typo (CSD R3).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting ZIP:00601, 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) 02:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:BCMap-doton-Victoria.png

A tag has been placed on Image:BCMap-doton-Victoria.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:BCMap-doton-Victoria.png|the 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kelly ^hi! 16:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vancouver Meetup 2008

May 5, Benny's Bagels, see here. You show as a CWNB Vancouverite (not really, but not too far away, and this is spam after all :), hope to see you there! Franamax (talk) 06:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Conservative Party of Canada.png)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:07, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Odango-Q.png)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo

You should add Sierra Leone to the list.84.134.87.152 (talk) 19:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:KVOS-TV logo.png)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:09, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help at Sailor Moon.

Hey chief, I'd like to enlist your aid in helping me make Collectonian understand that Hitoshi Doi and Fansview are reliable sources for the edits she's marked as "vandalism" of mine. If you could take a look over there, I'd appreciate it. I'd certainly like someone who is a administrator to weigh in since she's being quite tendentious all over wikipedia of late. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 08:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are gonna ask for help, don't freaking lie about it. I did not mark it as vandalism, I asked you to discuss it on the talk page to show why you feel it meets WP:RS when the site itself does not give any such indication it does. Instead, you just reverted with no summary and ran around whining about it. Its a GA article, you don't want to prove the sources are reliable, fine, let go to GAR or delisting. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 08:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because supplemental citations for a reliably sourced statement that support the original citation's statement should be challenged and tagged on sight. And, for the record, I guess you did not label me a vandal. I read that incorrectly and I apologize. I still question your action in reverting my edit and continue to state that the sources are reliable. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 12:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Moon-16.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Moon-16.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Vancouver Island

Hi; saw your name in the edit history of the flag-image. You wouldn't happen to know its blazon if it has one do you? i.e. was this official heraldry or by-the-seat-of-the-pants heraldry. I can understand Neptune's trident, the beaver and the pinecone....why t he cadeucus, do you think? Helmcken's idea?Skookum1 (talk) 22:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your recent edit to the National Research concil time signal

please do edit this article as it contain correct infomation the signal is twenty five seconds not fifteen seconds i hope that we're clear on thisPeterparker3000 (talk) 23:41, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WICU-logo - trademark? Huh?

What possible trademark issues could there be with the WICU-logo.svg file? Fair use standards apply here, as there is no attempt to infringe on the M*A*S*H logo. This is just plain silly. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 08:28, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFD

I have nominated license fee for deletion, because it is not entirely clear to me that somebody who searches for "license fee" is looking for the television license fee, specifically. That having been said, I learned something new today. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 02:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of the African Union

Hi. I was wondering if your offer to recreate the African Union flag still stands? It was deleted today over at commons and it's very unfortunate that we can't find a free image. Thanks so much. --Patrick (talk) 03:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Monarchy of Canada questions of admin actions

Can you explain your actions here? They seem clearly strange.

Two idiot editors were engaged in a lame content dispute about image positioning. They were clearly edit waring. Both were blocked for a week. G2bambino (talk · contribs) and PrinceOfCanada (talk · contribs)
The matter was discussed on ANI [1]
You unblock ONE of the [participants.http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3APrinceOfCanada] # 03:47, 24 September 2008 Tiptoety (Talk | contribs) blocked "G2bambino (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 1 week ‎ (Disruptive editing: right back at it with User:PrinceOfCanada on Monarchy of Canada)the next day (fair enough)
You protect the article 08:01, 25 September 2008 Denelson83 (Talk | contribs) m (Protected Monarchy of Canada: Edit warring / Content dispute ([edit=sysop] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indefinite))) Why? The edit war has (by your own reckoning) stopped. Indeed one of the participants remains blocked
You then edit the protected article back to the version preferred by PrinceofCanada [2] - because in your (content judgement) that version is "correct".

Why did you unblock ONE participant? (actually I've no big problem with that) Why did you protect an article if the edit waring had stopped? And why did you edit a protected article - one you had protected - to the version preferred by the editor you unblocked? And what is the justification for keeping the article protected at the version you preffer? See also m:The Wrong Version. Oh, just for the record, I've never had an interest in the content of the article - and don't care about the lame edit war over images itself.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 08:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been discussing this situation with PrinceOfCanada on IRC. I can give you the transcript of my conversation with him if you wish.

He claims his edits were following the Manual of Style, which I consider to be "the ultimate consensus".

Also, I didn't unblock G2bambino because he stated that he had left Wikipedia (m:Right to vanish). However, he is now unblocked as well.

-- Denelson 83 08:17, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You still needlessly protected an article, and then edited it. I think whether it was MOS was precisely the content dispute - so basically one side persuaded the protecting admin "on IRC" to revert a protected article to his version. Have you any idea how bad this looks?--Scott MacDonald (talk) 09:14, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. So how am I supposed to handle this type of situation again in the future? PrinceOfCanada asked on #wikipedia, which is where I normally hang out, if an admin could help him with a problem he needed solved. I was apparently the only admin paying attention there. -- Denelson 83 09:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly don't protect an article unless there is a live edit war (and I suggest you unprotect it now). Once you've acted as an admin and protected an article, then it stays at the protected version until the dispute is resolved through normal dispute resolution. Never edit a protected article, unless to remove a clear BLP violation. Once you've acted as an admin, you need to stay aloof from content issues. If you want to take sides in the content disputes, then you must not use admin tools. You need to decide whether to help as an admin or as an editor - not both. If Prince is correct, then dispute resolution is where he needs to go. As I say, I've no particular problem with the unblocking, although you should probably have noted in in the ANI discussion.--Scott MacDonald (talk) 09:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Already done. The article is no longer protected. -- Denelson 83 09:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also strongly disagree with your unblock, and would have liked to have at least known about it. Please understand that the block was not simply to protect that one article but to protect a whole range of articles that were being disrupted by G2bambino along with PrinceOfCanada, and simply protecting that article is not going to solve this long standing dispute. Also, only unblocking one half of the participants really tells one that their actions are acceptable but the others are not when they both equally edit warred. Either way, I will not wheel war but I would like to note my disagreement with your unblock. Tiptoety ^talk 15:34, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to say that you've left the article in PrinceOfCanada's preferred version, which is non-neutral. You may agree with PoC's position, but your discussion with him remains out of the public sphere, leaving your views unknown, and we are guided to maintain the status quo while disputed edits are being discussed; there was a consensus on that page before the dispute began. Rest assured that returning it to that point does not restore the version I want; I'm now well aware that what sat before was incorrect per WP:MOS, but will leave it alone until we can decide on exactly what to do. --G2bambino (talk) 15:43, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: List of television stations in North America by media market

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as List of television stations in North America by media market, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from Nielsen Market Research, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:List of television stations in North America by media market and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:List of television stations in North America by media market with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:List of television stations in North America by media market.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:List of television stations in North America by media market/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:List of television stations in North America by media market saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! User:2008Olympian_chitchat^seemywork 02:02, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CSS IPA vowel chart

The "superfluous markup" you removed is needed on the Wikimedia Commons side to link back to the Wikipedia articles explaining the height and backness values. If it's removed on this side, the difference should be documented in the comment at the top so it can be preserved in future edits. Since it doesn't hurt anything to keep it, though, I figured it was best to leave as much as possible identical. Would you mind reverting this edit?

Thanks for providing this chart and all the nice audio examples! The consistency and thoroughness are great. Not R (talk) 20:19, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

m (111,096 bytes) (he?) (undo)

Sorry for that, not english native ;p (my english teacher would beat me if she saw that). By the way do you think that section is clear and comprehensible?

Ty Almighty001 (talk) 22:18, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GPS: This article needs additional citations for verification?

Denelson83, Where do you think more citations are needed in the GPS article? There are a lot of references already in the article. New ones are being added all the time. With all the references we already have and the rate at which new ones are being added, do we really need to increase the rate at which new ones are being added? RHB100 (talk) 20:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of AM Radio (band)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article AM Radio (band), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

non notable band

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, 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. Oo7565 (talk) 18:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian weather radar network

Hi,

Good job putting the coordonates on this article. I had to change back the coordonates of Lac Castor as there was an error in the call letters that confused you. Lac castor is CWMB (north of Quebec City at 48N 70W) and Marion Bridge is CXMB (on Cape Breton at 45 N 60W). I cleared that confusion too. Keep the good work.

Pierre cb (talk) 16:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Vanisle.png

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Vanisle.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:37, 13 January 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:37, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Google OS

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Google OS. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ~ Paul^T+/_C 20:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Templates for commons move 'auto-tag'

These are a list of protected templates, on which the commons auto tag applied to other Image licensing tags (such as to PD-Self) would be desirable,

Some image stemplates media have been omitted because of specfic details, making an auto-tag unwise. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:03, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah! Promote Commons. Unfortunatly this will overflow Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons. Not all of these images can be copied to Commons right away, the images first need to be checked for proper author and source. Maybe create another category to seperate these images from images tagged with {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}? multichill (talk) 13:35, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: see Neurolysis and User talk:Sfan00 IMG for related discussion(s).Soundvisions1 (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SMPTE Color Bars

Thanks for pointing out the possible copyvio in uploading an image of a waveform monitor from a website. Perhaps I can just take one myself and upload it through Commons. Have you done this before, and if so, can you please advise on the requirements? --Thomprod (talk) 13:52, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering how you came about the color levels on your SMPTE color bars. Now I can't vouch for IrfanView's SVG translator, but it seems that the levels are off by a few counts. Our company's video test pictures don't match yours. Please contact me ASAP on most networks as bubblecdn. Hansschulze (talk) 23:45, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move to commons auto tag -

OK

Following some disscusions , the issue with {{self}} are solved...

However, there are some cleanup issues that need to be done because of some goings on during the discussions..

i) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:CommonsEncouraged&oldid=265274253 needs to be restored to be the live version of that template.

ii) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Self/sandbox&oldid=265691710 should become the live version of self.

iii) Instances of Self using an additonal |commons= at the end will need to be converted because of the 'fix', which was to allow for example {{GFDL|commons=<param>}} to be passed to {{self}} instead of just GFDL as at present.

Once these changes are made , the migration from manual {{move to commons}} tagging , should expect for a few specfic licenses/ cases be completed :)

)

Hopefully this should reduce the number of 'free' images on enwiki that should be on Commons :)

Leave a note on my talk page, if you have questions, or when the above edits are done :) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:22, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus?

Hello, I see that on January 20 you made edits to numerous templates by adding the {{CommonsEncouraged}} tag without any consensus to do so. We now have incorrectly licensed imaged not only being tagged with "Images from works of this type are candidates to be copied to the Wikimedia Commons using the Transwiki process." but also being added to Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons. Please consider reverting all of your changes until there has been a community discussion on this change. As this seems to have been been done with Sfan00 IMG I am posting a message on their page as well. Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 15:51, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE: see User talk:Neurolysis and User talk:Sfan00 IMG for discussion(s). Also I did not see the ""Templates for commons move 'auto-tag'" thread above, however there is no consensus to make the change there. Soundvisions1 (talk) 16:51, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted those templates as per the above concerns. DS (talk) 20:25, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still showing up in some so not everyhting has been reverted. See File:RAC Original Directors.jpg as an example. Soundvisions1 (talk) 13:29, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rolling Rs

Sorry about posting this on your User page in error. I have never been able to master rolling Rs either. If you find a method that works, please let me know. Cheers! --Thomprod (talk) 13:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]