My talk page suggestions 1) Please use the link provided above or click the [+] tab to leave me a message 2) Use a short, descriptive title for your comment 3) Sign your comment with four tildes (~~~~) 4) I will respond on your talk page unless requested to respond here
Thanks for applying to use VandalSniper! You have been approved. If have not already done so, you may find instructions to install VS on the project page.
As some of the libraries VandalSniper runs on are currently in transition, there have been a few issues reported with setup. At the moment, Linux is the most compatible platform for VS. If you have questions or problems, you may find help on the project page or its talk page. Please also feel free to contact me for help and I will do my best to assist you.
No - not holding my breath either. I mainly wrote it for the amusement of the bass page regulars! I noticed that one of the associated pages was from .li or Liechtenstein. This does not give me a lot of confidence!
I had a bit of a trawl around WP the other day looking for advice or policies of what to do in this situation. Most of the stuff that I found was advice regarding material copied into WP. The main thing I found was the standard contribution policy was that GFDL means that we retain copyright, so I wrote the e-mail from this point of view.
But today, looking around, I found several standard letters on Wikipedia:Standard GFDL violation letter that I should have used. The "individual" one probably applies to the photo, and the standard ones can probably be used regarding the text. My contribution to the article is pretty small, old, has been edited over (except for the bit about 41Hz etc) so I am happy to leave the next e-mail to one of you.
All the best, Andrew Kepert09:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Got your response, and as mentioned in Talk:Double bass I eventually found the correct GFDL violation procedure and WP:MF. In some respects GFDL is close to public domain, in that it makes it free for anyone to copy and then develop and refine from there. However, in GFDL, the original is used under licence in the derived work, with the copyright retained by the author. Most transgressions of this are mild, but in this case the koopal.com has automatically slapped their copyright on the derivative work. Even with public domain they can only copyright their modifications, which amount to copy-paste of paragraphs.
Anyway, I agree with you about copyright - as I see it, IP (copyright, patents, etc) has some value, but when it had to change it actually moved against the original principles due to corporate and national meddling. Much of the original intent of copyleft is that "copyright sucks, so let's use copyleft to subvert it", and so offending parties who try to restrict the use of the derived work need to be reminded that they are violating copyright. In my ideal world, GFDL, GPL etc would look very different, if there was a reason for them to exist at all. Cheers, Andrew Kepert05:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bottesini,
thanks a lot for your helpful "getting started" pointers and suggestions! I'll read through them and hope that I can contribute to Wikipedia's piano music content. PianoDabbler10:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for voting in my RfA which at 51/20/6 unfortunately did not achieve consensus. In closing the nomination, Essjay remarked that it was one of the better discussed RfAs seen recently and I would like to thank you and all others who chose to vote for making it as such. It was extremely humbling to see the large number of support votes, and the number of oppose votes and comments will help me to become stronger. I hope to run again for adminship soon. Thank you all once more. Wikiwoohoo20:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!
Thanks for the welcome message on my talk-page, Bottesini. I'm learning all the time.
I was wondering if you might know the opus numbers/any other information of the various Dragonetti concerti...I'm not very familiar with his works and it's difficult to find information on the internet.
Hi, Bottesini.
Sorry to bother you, but you're the only person I've been in contact with since I started a few days ago.
If you take a look at my Talk page, you'll see that someone called 'Walter Humala - Emperor of West Wikipedia' has kindly offered to "adopt" me. What's that all about?!
Looking at his own Talk page, I see that he is, to put it mildly, a few cards short of the deck. No offence to anyone.
Or am I just being paranoid? I know one shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth, or whatever, but there's a lot of crazies out there. No offence to anyone, etc.
Cheers!
Concordia is currently trying to relaunch. I, and all the members of the ex-council, wish to welcome new members to the group. We are a group who aim to promote remaining civil, in an environment where messages can easily be interpretated wrongly.
Help out now!
Try and help people remain civil! Talk to them, and help them in any way possible. Do not be afraid to use the talk page.
We are a community, so can only work though community contributions and support. It's the helping that counts.
Decision Making
The council expired one month ago, but due to the current position of the group the current council will remain until the position of the group can be assessed, and whether it would be sensible to keep Concordia going. For most decisions, however, it will be decided by all who choose to partake in discussions. I am trying to relaunch because of the vast amounts of new members we have received, demonstrating that the aims are supported.
If you wish to opt of of further talk-page communications, just let us know here.
Thanks for the reply. Obviously, I wouldn't want someone like the guy in question to "adopt" me. Anyone who writes "u" instead of "you" is a major numpty. As for the adoption concept itself . . . it's a fine idea, but I think I can manage without it. Cheers!
Thank you for the welcome, especially for the advice to sign my posts. May I ask what caused you to notice me at all? I know I'm not as knowledgeable about Wiki procedures as I ought to be, but I try not to be a nincompoop. Cstaffa03:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed your talk page at uncyclopedia:User talk:Bottesini and that it refers people to this talk page. If you want to link here from there, you need to use [[wikipedia:user talk:bottesini|my Wikipedia talk page]] as the link, not [[:en:user talk:bottesini|my Wikipedia talk page]]. Otherwise, if you just want to have people click through an endless loop, leave it alone. I just wanted to let you know in case it was an error. Wodup08:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As I can see, you look like a very highly respectable administator of wikipedia, and most valued to say the least, but it has crossed my mind due to recent circumstances that you seemed to have blocked my pages that I have made which is linked with the English Premeirleague Referee 'Uriah Rennie'.
The article was created via my personal time, i hope you value that, but I think Wikipedia were wrong to block the article, and then I was further implimentented as 'total nonense' and videos to google video. I have taken this to heart because the show has actually progressed onto Television, onto shows such as 'Tarrant on TV' and 'Outrageous Show 2006' broadcasted by BSkyB and ITV respectively.
I hope you may let me recreate the article, and furthermore I hope we can become great friends via he use of Wikipedia,
There is a link to your subpages from the WikiProject Classical Music that is supposed to provide a "member of" template. It does not seem to exist. In any case it does not produce a userbox.
I've tried changing the capitalization in the link, then I tried inserting the raw code for people to copy. But I'm new to Wiki code and this doesn't seem to be working out. Can you advise me? -- Rob C (Alarob)20:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
i have played with all the members of the original 'dread' at one time or another, and while i would not say they are on my list of top ten rock bands of all time, i certainly think they were individually talented and entertaining as a group to a significant degree. I saw them live at the old Palamino in North Hollywood circa 1991 and was thouroughly entertained by their musicianship and arrangements. Quite humorous also, I thought.
Carl Jah (aka Carl Jon Haasis) and Spice (aka Chris Boerin) were bandmates of mine in the early to mid 80's, and I found them both talented and creative. (the band was called either Danelectro or Even/Odd). That you have such vitriolic opinions regarding DZ in general implies that your personal experience(s) with the band was unpleasant, as there is no verifiable doumentation to support your assertion that they were as mucically 'challenged' as you claim. They were, after all, a cover band.
I challenge you to reveal your connection to this group of musicians, and, other than your personal dislike for their music, document your true reason(s) for wanting to defame them so seriously.
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315
I tried to place your userbox inside a {{babel}} box on my user page, it seems to break the box & not display normally. I noticed it seems to lack the border most other boxes have, which may be causing the problem? It displays fine outside the frame. thx —Turangalilatalk21:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot06:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot05:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Garykarr.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot10:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Harp.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast19:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Octet.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) 19:02, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Koussevitzky on Time.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 04:03, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
AfD nomination of Prussian Blue (duo)
An editor has nominated Prussian Blue (duo), an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "What Wikipedia is not").
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. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated Josh Bell, 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/Josh Bell. 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. crassic![talk]00:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Le sarei grato se volesse tenere in considerazione la mia composizione "Suite I" per contrabbasso e il contributo che ho dato alla letteratura per il contrabbasso.
Maestro Fernando Grillo
Head of the Department of double bass at the
Music Conservatory, "S. Cecilia", in Rome.
Dear Bottesini,
I would be pleasing if my “Suite I” for double bass and the contribution that I have given to the literature for our instrument, wanted to hold in your kind consideration.
Yours sincerely,
Fernando Grillo
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Carowinds.PNG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Carowinds.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) 05:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Signpost updated for July 28, August 9, 11 and 18, 2008.
Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.
Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Serious Wikipedians (NOT speaking of you) seem to wax slightly swell-headed about their abilities and their use of form over function. As to whether an article gets voted "featured" or not, well, many articles out there qualify. If they're factually accurate, complete, and in a good encyclopedic form, those articles deserve a star too, and should be featured in higher #'s than 1 per diem. In fact, many articles recently have been about rather trivial matters, creeks and roads and plays- when others of more import were left out. With that said:
Part of encyclopedic form, supra, is full impartiality. Be it hopscotch or Hitler, an encyclopedic account must have no hint of bias- or it ceases to be a true font of knowledge. CE is inherently biased, as it lives not for mankind, not for more accurate dating, but for pure partiality as an overt contrivance in opposition to AD (which exists as a convenient way of dating things from an easily-remembered event). CE makes no difference in the scheme of history or in dating; it bases itself completely on anno domini, bears no distinction from the latter, and is only held up by those who preach the childish and rather self-righteous thinking that AD is somehow offensive or biased (after 1400+ years of not being so).
CE in and of itself makes no difference, detractors will say; and in its own right, they're correct. It's the slippery slope that one must be careful about, which is already visible in the form of all matters PC. CE is born of this school of thought. It's a wrong-headed, speech-chilling philosophy, and should be confronted and reversed at all times.
Interesting: those who favor CE claim they want neutrality in dating, when in fact they don't; they want dating devoid of their concept of religion, and to force others to accept their thinking. AD supporters simply want what exists now, which is a simple system based on something acknowledged by all as usable. Those in the CE camp also picked out AD for special treatment because they knew that many who use it are tepid when it comes to accomodating others (read: the whole USA, lol), and that they are likelier to get a foothold in a more secular society like America (where we already are all bent out of shape about school prayer, Nativity scenes, and so on). Had they started their campaign in Israel or Saudi Arabia, they'd have been deported or worse.
Regarding the editors and those who judge articles for featured status: yes, they do a lot of hard work and sprucing up before putting the gold star on an article. No real fault of theirs here; they just missed something, and someone corrected it. It's licit to correct an article for plain error- even a featured one, which retains the "Edit This Page" link. Why not make something excellent even better?
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me :) Best, John Sawyer 18 April 2009... AD (or would you prefer XIV a.d. Kal. Mai. MMDCCLXII AUC?) lol... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cesium 133 (talk • contribs) 11:14, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
File:KoussevitzkyFoundation.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:KoussevitzkyFoundation.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:KoussevitzkyFoundation.png]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:03, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
File source problem with File:Bottesiniwithbass.jpg
File Copyright problem
Thanks for uploading File:Bottesiniwithbass.jpg. 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.
hi i was wondering if you could tell me where you got that c extension. i looks a lot better than the one fitted to my instrument. email arthewetson@gmail.com thank you!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.251.182 (talk) 04:34, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for uploading File:Homer mensch.jpg. 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, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.
If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:26, 8 March 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. B (talk) 22:26, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Kolkata
I have nominated Kolkata for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.)--- Jayanta Nath(Talk|Contrb)04:15, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Badlydrawnjeff.png or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.
This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out)12:39, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for quality articles such as Karr-Koussevitzky double bass, for welcoming new users, for beginning the classical music members' list, for improving articles around the double bass, with a user name to match, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!
I would like to publish a video on YouTube where the disciples of William Primrose talk about their memories. May I use the Primrose photo you provide on Wikipedia in this video?
If you can forgive me, do I need a copyright notation for "Bottesini"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurvenal69 (talk • contribs) 13:46, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
— 16 March 2009
User talk:Lugnuts, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Lugnuts and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User talk:Lugnuts during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:41, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
