User talk:Inwind/Archive 1

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Inwind! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. You may also push the signature button located above the edit window. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! -- Chavatshimshon 01:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting your info out there
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Getting Help
Getting along
Getting technical

License tagging for Image:Suzlonlogo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Suzlonlogo.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

{{Renewable-energy-stub}} / Category:Renewable energy stubs

Hey. You created this stub type out of process. New stubs must first be discussed at WP:WSS. I have listed your creation at the Discoveries page and a discussion will now take place there and possibly also at WP:SFD. Thanks. - crz crztalk 17:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Severn Barrage

Inwind, why did you remove the Severn Barrage from Category:Renewable energy ? Are you saying that tidal is now a renewable source? Fig 10:10, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bhagavad Gita

Hi Inwind, I can see what you were aiming at but I honestly think that in this case the picture looks better in the introduction with the Hindu Scriptures banner in the scriptures section for those who want to look further. Yours sincerely, Gouranga(UK) 11:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grigori Rasputin

Hi. I think you were trying to make a productive edit, but it looks like maybe in this change to Grigori Rasputin you may have ignored an edit conflict and accidentally reintroduced some vandalism. You might want to take a look at it (and at surrounding edits) and try to figure out what went wrong. (I'm fixing it.)

Jordan Brown 17:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: United Kingdom

Hi Inwind, well I understand your reasons now but it is very wrong. You can rewrite some paragraph in summary style if you want to make article shorter but you can never remove valid reference. A) It doesn't make article shorter - only source code is shorter and it isn't really an issue - references and oher sources should not be counted into article lenght because they are not part of main text and so they don't make the actual reading take longer time. And B) references are needed to reference the text. If you want to verify a statement you are not going to go through the entire Wikipedia to see if it is cited somewhere else. I hope I clarified it a bit. Thank you.--Pethr 17:49, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replying on other user' talk page is pretty common practice because you're notified about new message and you don't have to be so awfully carefull about watching user talk in your watchlist. But of course I don't mind or anything. Best --Pethr 22:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Finite Element Method

Hi. Note that Category:Finite Element Method should be instead Category:Finite element method, in lowercase, per Wikipedia style. You can reply here if you have comments. Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done Inwind 16:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. But you actually need to go and edit each article in Category:Finite Element Method to make it appear in Category:Finite element method. After that I can delete Category:Finite Element Method. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seems a rather awkward process. I should hope that a script exists to do this automatically.Inwind 03:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, unfortunately. Either you fix it, or somebody else will have to do it. I can write a bot to do this particular renaming, but writing and debugging such a program would take more time than doing it by hand. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:43, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tool

Hi, I was wondering what the point of your first first change in [1] is? It looks to me like having "This article is about a tool used as a piece of equipment. For the American progressive rock band, see Tool (band). For other uses, see Tool (disambiguation)." at the top of the article is a good idea, especially as looking at the disambiguation page, the band is likely to be the main "non-hammer" reason to go to the Tool page. Thanks Gavinatkinson 16:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"g", not "k" in Danish|Dansk!!!

How come Danish|Dansk has a "g", not a "k" (for example Frankrig (not [[:da:Frankrik|Frankrik]]), Østrig (not [[:da:Østrik|Østrik]]), Bog (not [[:da:Bok|Bok]]), Bruger (not [[:da:Bruker|Bruker]])) and other examples!!! By Fiet Nam (16:18, Wednesday, January 8, 2025 (UTC)), leave a message on my talk page!!!

North Sea

Due to your recent helpful edits to North Sea id appreciate your thoughts, comments, edits on my proposed summary of the currently very long history section available here User:Jieagles/North Sea History. Thanks Jieagles 22:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations are needed in the lead. SeeTalk:North Sea#Some suggestions for the ongoing discussion. As per WP:LEADCITE, there is not, however, an exception to citation requirements specific to leads. The necessity for citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case basis by editorial consensus. Complex, current, or controversial subjects may require many citations; others, few or none. As there is an ongoing discussion regarding citations in the lead, a consensus must be reached before you remove the citation needed tags. At least, that is what I believe.Smallman12q (talk) 22:38, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tall Ships

Hi Inwind, Tall Ships is a charitable endeavour, can you please refrain from deleteing all my work in such a malicious way. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.3.88.198 (talk) 17:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 86.3.88.198, I suggest that you create an account with Wikipedia, to enable other users to contact you and explain what should be linked and what not. For the time being I suggest that you check carefully, whether the link you add provides important information related to the article. It is also highly recommended to use talk-pages like Talk:Tall ship before starting an edit war. Inwind 17:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of class C airports in the Canada

Should that be "List of class C airports in Canada" or "List of Class C airports in Canada" and do you have a reference? I looked but couldn't find anything. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HVAC and Mechanical Engineering

You said : Hi Pzavon, a number of engineering disciplines contribute to HVAC. The best place to add these categories is in category:HVAC. Some categories - like mechanical engineering - will become very big, if all related articles are included. Inwind (talk) 17:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pzavon"

Isn't that what categories are for? (i.e. What is the intrinsic objection to a category becomming very big?) Pzavon (talk) 03:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Werner Schröer

Hi, please have a look at the talk page of Werner Schröer Talk:Werner Schroer. I believe that German sources are a bit more reliable with respect to getting it right when it comes to the spelling of his last name. I therefore believe we should list him as Werner Schröer and not Werner Schroer. What do you think?MisterBee1966 (talk) 09:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Compression ignition

I have turned this page into a redirect to "Diesel engine", where the subject is already covered. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tesla's Birthplace

It is indeed unusual to state the birthplace of an individual with so much detail, but, if you take a look at the talk page, you'll see a very long and very bitter dispute over it. In this extraordinary case, I suggest we keep it as it is, since the long description is not factually incorrect after all, only a bit long, and this compromise has satisfied all sides. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frankman (talk • contribs) 23:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FICE

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article FICE, 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 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. 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 agree with the 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 FICE. Fabrictramp (talk) 20:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Germany Invitation

Hello, Inwind! I'd like to call your attention to the WikiProject Germany and the German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board. I hope their links, sub-projects and discussions are interesting and even helpful to you. If not, I hope that new ones will be.


--Zeitgespenst (talk) 00:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Little context in Category:Oil fields in the North Sea

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Oil fields in the North Sea, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Oil fields in the North Sea is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Oil fields in the North Sea, 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) 05:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pauline Rudd

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Pauline Rudd, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.counterbalance.net/bio/prudd-body.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Pauline Rudd

A tag has been placed on Pauline Rudd 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 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 18:47, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

my talk page

You are the one that needs to read them, because neither of them are policies. As the first says it is NOT a guideline or a policy. And the second says it is merely a guideline. Basically neither are policy. And furthermore what was included had a citied reference.Swampfire (talk) 16:38, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aircraft noise

Thanks for your note, but the ref still has to appear in the article. The ref on that page doesn't support the statement you have claimed, it just lists three airports - hardly all of the world or even Europe! I have added the ref from that page and corrected the text to the ref. If you can find a ref that says that most airports in Europe or the world have night restrictions then cite it. Otherwise I have to challenge that statement. I have lived and flown in quite a number of countries and most have few or no night restricted airports. - Ahunt (talk) 16:09, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Java Platform edits

Hi,

I've undone your change to this article which made it a disambiguation page. In general, Wikipedia should attempt to link users with the most obvious article when they click on a link; in this case, most of the time that articles refer to the "Java Platform" they're referring to the platform as a whole, rather than to one of Sun's branded subsets. For this reason, the link Java Platform should point to the relevant section of the software article, rather than being a disambiguation page. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

internal combustion engine

Hi,

The timeline was discussed before and most ppl (all but 2 users ignored it) semeed to think it should belong there. I don't want to sound like a nerd, but you should edit in the discussion page before doing something drastic in the article itself. Just some advice. Anyway, if you feel that strongly about it we should at least add a summary. Whats you think? InternetHero (talk) 20:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since no information is lost I think splitting a long article is nothing drastic. A summary - ideally as a text rather than a timeline - would be nice. I will have a go at it over the next few days.Inwind (talk) 06:57, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adits

I don't want to get into a revert war, but you are obviously unfamiliar with mines and mining. Have you ever even been in a mine? Can you name one mine that consists only of an adit? Let's look at the definition you yourself referred to in Underground mining (hard rock): "Adits are horizontal excavations". It nowhere says that adits are types of mines, because mines are combinations of a number of interconnected workings: adits, shafts, stopes, drifts, and raises, to name a few. None of these individually makes up the mine; the mine is the totality of these. If you want, I could list for you examples of mines I have been in, and how they included adits, but also included many other types of excavations. Plazak (talk) 16:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Awesome Festival

A tag has been placed on Awesome Festival 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 club, 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 indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guidelines for people and for organizations.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. mboverload@ 10:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your inappropriate merges

I am surprise that you so inappropriately merged supralittoral zone and sublittoral zone into littoral zone. Surely you first read the discussion which clearly did not endorse this merge. To add my tuppence worth, I don't support it either. --Geronimo20 (talk) 21:44, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Heritage sites in Bavaria

A tag has been placed on Heritage sites in Bavaria requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Somno (talk) 08:17, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hamburg Rathaus

Hi there, I've thought about to move / split it. Thanks, even if I'm not mentionend in the page history (now!!! ;-) Do you think the title is okay? Not Hamburger Rathaus or Town hall of Hamburg? Are you able to do me a favor? Please read "my" articles for grammar and spelling. Greetings Sebastian scha. (talk) 09:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of Rathaus in Wikipedia like Rotes Rathaus. I like your bold approach and will see where I can help doing some copyediting. Inwind (talk) 10:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thats's nice. Thank you. Most important to me at the moment is Sport in Hamburg and Boroughs and quarters of Hamburg, History of Hamburg is in my sandbox and will take a while. Sebastian scha. (talk) 18:08, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Updated DYK query On 6 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hamburg Rathaus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Congratulations and keep up the good work! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:42, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gisela

Well, she was the earliest, the most important entry at Gisela (disambiguation) (as far as I could tell), and the first to have an article here to my knowledge. However, I mostly reverted you because you left Gisela redirecting to Gisela (daughter of Pepin the Short), in which case there's no need for a longer title. Also, you did not include any link to Gisela (disambiguation) or change that dab page to reflect your move, so readers were left with a bit of a problem. It's not a big deal; the status quo just seemed like the easiest way to fix it.--Cúchullain t/c 20:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

North Sea

Hey. It's been a while but I finally went back over the North Sea article and am hoping to renominate it for GA shortly. As an active contributor to the serious improvements made a year or so ago, I'd like to invite you to take a fresh look at it, do any clean up or copy editing I've missed and generally think about how to make it better. Thanks -- Jieagles (talk) 08:28, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

are you still working on North Sea...there have been edit conflicts lately...Was going to replace dead links for a bit...SriMesh | talk 19:55, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you...for the time today. I think the article should get GA as it is so much better, and should even march straight to FA fairly well. I left my progress notes on the talk page.SriMesh | talk 22:59, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Three-revert rule warning

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on United States. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. Three reverts in 7 hours, 15 minutes. Please familiarize yourself with our rules and customs on reverting.—DCGeist (talk) 21:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

River Thames

Grüsse Gott Thank you for your interest in our greatest river. The article is long and contains a considerable amount of information. For this reason a summary has been provided as a benefit for the reader. This is not the only instance. The use of over-long ledes is discouraged and it is good to keep the table of contents close to the top. The article has had this summary for over a year now and, with several hundred thousand readers in that time, has met with no previous objection. I am sorry that this is outside your previous experience, but that is no reason to change it. In fact I commmend it to you for wider use because the interests of the reader are more important than the imposition of unnecessary conformity. I prefer not to spend my time on talk pages as this has interrupted my editing. Regards Motmit (talk) 21:52, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

North Sea

Thank you for your contributions to the North Sea article. I have re-written some sections so that they can have sources, references and citations for every fact. Can you be a second set of eyes, and see if every number, year, new piece of info has a citation please. If you see a copy edit that needs being done, could you also help the article in the midst of the GA review. The GA review is currently studying the verifiablity of the article and if it is properly referenced with verifiable sources for facts. Kind Regards and thank you.SriMesh | talk 00:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks again, for spending some time on the article. I hope it can progress again soon. SriMesh | talk 20:42, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your edits are still awesome, thanks for catching the hotel ref. The article is still on hold for the GA. I think I opened all references to see if the 'facts' for the citation holds. Some sections underwent a rewrite to comply to available sources. I let Philcha know, and it looks like he may be checking it over according to the history page. Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 06:40, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Inwind, I think the references regarding migratory birds and fish should be kept and I will be restoring them. Those references are specifically for the North Sea and I don't think a reader should have to go to another article to find them. Thanks, --Jh12 (talk) 20:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jh12, since the north sea article is very well referenced, I believe that references should be reduced, where they are not required (Wikipedia:Citing sources). Since there is the article on Environmental effects of wind power, there is no need to have the refs in both articles. The wikilink is the preferred way of linking information. Inwind (talk) 20:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Inwind, thanks for your contributions, but I don't think that's what Wikipedia:Citing sources says. If a reader sees the article, they shouldn't have to figure out where information on North Sea is mentioned on another page and then find the reference for that information on another page. I think all information on North Sea should be referenced directly on that page and if it is duplicated in some way on another article, both articles should be referenced. Take Benjamin Franklin High School (New Orleans, Louisiana). Almost all important statements are referenced directly. I do not have to click on Blue Ribbon School to verify that the school won blue ribbons or click on Louisiana High School Athletic Association to verify the school sports championships. I believe articles should be able to stand alone in terms of verifiability. To get more input, I'm going to start a thread at Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests#North_Sea_references. Best and have a great weekend! --Jh12 (talk) 22:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Bikini

Generally the earliest finds of anything which has a old enough story to tell does it in as much details as possible in the early part, and gradually become more constrained. That's how encyclopedias, academic journals, magazines and newspapers go in style of writing. The article is very much in under construction, and it would be greatly beneficial if we stop removing stuff, rather than strengthening the weak spots. I perfectly appreciate your concern, but method-wise, I guess, we need to keep it for now. Since the article is being worked on, very much, just have a bit ore patient. You'll have ample time to remove almost anything you don't like later. Aditya(talk • contribs) 09:30, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Update Would you take a look at the whole history section? It's still far from done, and the copy is atrocious. But, do take a look and let me know on the article talk page what you think. Please, do feel free to point out the problems. I may not always agree with you, but, at least I promise to work on all the problems identified. Aditya(talk • contribs) 05:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Care

Please read WP:ENGVAR and WP:MOSS before you make any more alterations similar to the one you made to Philip Larkin. Thank you. almost-instinct 16:48, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wind turbine aerodynamics

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Wind turbine aerodynamics, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Wind turbine design. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:15, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:StampMiddelgrunden.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:StampMiddelgrunden.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 15:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Speedy deletion of File:StampMiddelgrunden.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:StampMiddelgrunden.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free image with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria.

If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the image can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the {{non-free fair use in|article name that the image is used in}} tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the image. If the image has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

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:File:StampMiddelgrunden.jpg|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. ww2censor (talk) 18:13, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use stamp images may only be used in articles about the stamp and not the subject of the stamp per Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images. Sorry. ww2censor (talk) 18:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:StampMiddelgrunden.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:StampMiddelgrunden.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media 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. PhilKnight (talk) 22:20, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Illiturgis

Could you please add some context to Illiturgis? I currently can't tell which country it's in. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 00:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Input requested at Sunset

Hi Inwind,

After a quick browse through the history of Sunset I've noticed you've previously edited the page. Your input is now requested in choosing a new lead picture here. Thanks for your time, --Fir0002 00:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Speedy deletion of Rivarossi

A tag has been placed on Rivarossi 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 company or corporation, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. manadude2 (talk) 23:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

North Sea

Me again. I think I finished re-opening references of the North Sea article, and matching details of prose to the corresponding citation, thus providing verifiability for the GA. I changed text so that it matched the facts proved in the citation this time, and had to delete some of the text :-( (This was hard to do, as it all seemed wonderful to the article), if I couldn't find a citation from last time, or this time. I let Pilcha know that I went through again. I am not sure where you are at in your endeavours. I sure hope it works out better this time. Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 21:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Inwind, I was really hoping to get more input at Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests#North_Sea_references, but it looks like it's slowed down. I still believe the references for the ecological effects should be added because they are important statements that have to be verified. The GA reviewer, User:Philcha seems to agree with me. I know the article is getting big, but I feel like readers should be able to depend on this article and verify all of the statements/facts without having to go anywhere else. If you have any problems with my restorations/future edits, please let me know on the article talk or my user talk page. Best, --Jh12 (talk) 16:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you removed useful links from the {{Wind power}} template's propulsion group. If you think it is a good idea to make people go hunting for information they don't know exists, we might as well just delete the whole template. The search box is there for anyone who already knows everything about wind power. Other people who are trying to learn about the subject may have no idea of the less obvious applications, and they may learn something by seeing more links in the navigation template. Now the template has a mostly empty row, which went from previously being informative, to mostly wasted space. Do you normally just delete stuff without asking the people who added the information why they added it, implying that those people had no idea what they were doing? --Teratornis (talk) 08:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I find templates very useful to have an easy access to related articles. However the scope has to be limited somewhere to avoid template becoming cluttered. The article on wind power contains very little about applications for propulsion. The most obvious application is through sails (including kites) to move ships or carts. I removed some more specific articles on kites since kites are using the wind to generate lift but they do not generate power. A template containig kites in the article on wind or lift may be more useful. Inwind (talk) 09:31, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To address your separate points individually:
  • Clutter - the propulsion row was never close to being cluttered, nor is there a noticeable growth trend in kite-related topics. Therefore to cite "clutter" makes no sense. Maybe if the template was starting to run out of room (as it did with the expanding list of "Wind power in country" entries), then clutter would be an issue. Clearly, there are more countries than could fit in one line, and we can expect more and more of them to have "Wind power in ..." articles. No such threat exists with kite-related articles. As there was no clutter, there was no need to gut the last group on the template. If you aren't interested in those links, you can easily ignore them. If we removed everything that isn't interesting to everyone, nothing would remain.
  • Power - lift-generating kites are of course producing power when they lift a load from ground level to some height above ground - the load does not magically appear at altitude. Even when a kite is static and merely suspending a load, it is still capturing and dissipating power from the wind to resist the pull of gravity, much as a hovering helicopter burns fuel to stay in one place. The hovering helicopter does no useful work in the sense of raising its load further, but it must still expend power to avoid falling down. When the helicopter runs out of fuel, it falls to the ground, exactly as a load-lifting kite will do if its source of power - the wind - stops. Only aerostats are able to suspend a load in the air without continuously dissipating some form of pwer. This is, by the way, relevant to the design of any airborne wind turbine of the aerodynamic variety. The need to divert some wind power to hold the apparatus up in the air must come at some cost in efficiency, compared to a tower-mounted wind turbine which uses the tower structure to generate the static force necessary to resist gravity. To resist gravity via aerodynamic forces alone requires some source of power.
I agree that Wikipedia needs more navigation templates. However, this is not a reason to remove useful information from existing templates. As the clutter and power arguments are inapplicable and incorrect, respectively, I am restoring the links you removed. --Teratornis (talk) 07:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Jud Süß (Feuchtwanger novel)

A tag has been placed on Jud Süß (Feuchtwanger novel) 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 company or corporation, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. -- btphelps (talk) (contribs) 11:58, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of wind turbine manufacturers

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of wind turbine manufacturers, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of wind turbine manufacturers. Thank you. Johnfos (talk) 02:14, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Harris Assassination RfD

If you've a moment, one'd much appreciate your participating in the RfD for the redirect thence to Republic of Haven. In redirecting a Harris Assassination article that was largely redundant to a section in Republic of Haven to the latter, you noted that a merge had been undertaken, but there is no corresponding entry in the history of the target, and so there is some confusion over whether a retention for GFDL preservation is required; if you did merge any non-trivial content or if you understand that some content was merged, then, your weighing in to that effect should be quite useful. Thanks, Joe 00:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Basta

Hey, it's ok to remove prod on Basta (Inkworld), but notability is still not established, nor references provided, so you can't remove tags. Advice: Wrestle with articles, not with editors. If you don't want to see those tags, fix the article. I'm not going to give you a vandalism warning or anything, but removing tags without cause falls under that category. Improve the article and everyone will be happy. Best wishes. --Boston (talk) 19:23, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Boston, thank you for the friendly note. The notability tag was accidentally removed. Inwind (talk) 19:34, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Organic fertilizers

Hi, I was wondering why it is that Category:Organic fertilizers only has two articles in it -- and whether it should be kept. Has it ever been more fully populated? Cgingold (talk) 13:57, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I created some time ago, but looked at other things in the mean time. It just needs populating. Will put a tag in. Inwind (talk) 14:37, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, glad to see you've started populating it. Cgingold (talk) 21:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New stamp category

Hi, why did you create Category:German postage stamp images in public domain etc? The images are already at commons and already organized there, making a category here and adding it to commons images just confuses things and adds no value. Stan (talk) 14:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The category is intended for a quick reference for those images used in the English Wikipedia. Inwind (talk) 14:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Guy Dawnay (British Army officer)

A tag has been placed on Guy Dawnay (British Army officer) 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. — Dædαlus Contribs 09:58, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hello, thank you for creating the disambiguation page for William Henry Harrison and his namesakes. I'm not familiar with how to do all those pages and links so your help is much appreciated. LovesMacs (talk) 23:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{Infobox Philosopher}}

Note: I'm talking German since this is the native tongue of both of us.

Ich hoffe dir ist klar, dass dieser Edit eine ganze Menge bestehender Infoboxen zerhauen hat, in denen jetzt überall Geburts- und Sterbedatum fehlt (bspw. Ludwig Wittgenstein, Theodor W. Adorno, Murray Rothbard). Schwebt dir da was vor, wie du das wieder gerade biegen willst? --bender235 (talk) 23:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

mountain and glacial landforms

what is your justification for depopulating Category:Mountain and glacial landforms? Now the category structure for Category:Landforms no longer matches the article List of landforms which was my intent in populating these landform categories. Hmains (talk) 01:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mountains and glacial landforms have a certain overlap, but I believe they should be kept in separate categories. I shall edit List of landforms to reflect this. Inwind (talk) 19:33, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would have edited also, but what is the documented source for any of these landform groupings? Hmains (talk) 03:13, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge edit summaries

Hi. I noticed that you merged a few articles recently. I have Prosciutto on my watchlist. Could you try to include a wikilink to the source article, e.g., "content copied from [[article name]]" per Help:Merging#Performing the merger? Thanks. Flatscan (talk) 04:46, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have split some of the content from Prosciutto to dry-cured ham with a note in the edit list. Inwind (talk) 05:47, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/Separation of different versions of same song

As somebody who appears to be interested in song articles you might be interested to know there is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs/coverversions with the purpose of trying to establish a standard rule for merge/separation of different versions of the same song. You are invited to comment. Regards, --Richhoncho (talk) 08:21, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Marie-Thérèse Chappaz

A tag has been placed on Marie-Thérèse Chappaz, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

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 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Favonian (talk) 20:36, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welsh Marches

Excuse me? I thought there was an expectation that editors discuss major changes first? You may think the list is better in a separate article, but I'm not persuaded. I'd appreciate the chance to have this discussed in an orderly way, with other editors who have been involved, on the article talk page first please. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By splitting a list from an article no information is lost, it is just a different way of presenting it. I suggest to maintain the 'new' version for a little while and wait for more opinions. Inwind (talk) 16:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The onus is on you to justify a change, on the article talk page. Until that is done, I will continue to disagree with your "new" version. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
PS: The correct way to proceed would have been to add a {{Split section}} message. So that's what I've done. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lauren Groff

Grüss Gott Inwind,

Your change smoked some links/references on the page. Please take a look at it.

Vielen Dank für Ihre Hilfe! I am the Botendaddy 23:40, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Test page

Hi, Inwind! I am somewhat puzzled by what you created this page for. Not only does it use old parameters (before the infobox re-design) and, as such, does not really illustrate proper usage, but it is also redundant to any live example that uses the box properly. Why not link to, say, Giaginsky District instead and get rid of the "test page" altogether?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 13:14, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

I am a bit surprised with the question, actually. Sourcing the information is covered by WP:REF#When to cite sources, which asks for all unreferenced statements to be either referenced, or removed, or marked as needing citation. It is not technically feasible to mark uncited statements in the body of the article, but the infoboxes, which condense the most important stats from the article in one prominently displayed place, are one location where it makes perfect sense to cite the information... and it's not too hard to implement automated fact tagging. Oftentimes the infobox is the only place a reader would even look; surely it's important we comply with our own policies regarding referencing?
The fact tags in this template were implemented properly, and citations are only requested for the pieces which present reasonable doubt as to their accuracy when left unsourced. We are not mandating, for example, that the "official website" field must be sourced, although if one desires, one can reference it as well—the template provides means to do that. It is, however, important to source something like the administrative center or the latest population figures.
The bottom line is that "uncommon" does not equal "unthinkable" does not equal "should be removed". Are you seeing any problems with the template these tags cause? Any problems that can't be addressed by actually adding a reference or removing the piece altogether? If so, please let me know, I'll happily fix them for you.
The discussion I was referring to can be found here and here (sorry the threads are somewhat intertwined and not in one place).
Also, I am awaiting your response in regards to the test page you created.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:49, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Moves

I have reverted your moves of articles such as this one. Disambiguating titles of articles for locations in Russia is covered by the WP:NC:CITY#Russia guideline. Please consult with that guideline before considering a move. Thank you.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 16:45, November 6, 2009 (UTC)


Orphaned non-free image (File:Logo Groupe Casino 2007.jpg)

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Logo Groupe Casino 2007.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).

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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 04:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image has been replaced with File:Groupe_Casino.svg and can be deleted. Inwind (talk) 09:43, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of horror films

Hey Inwind, Good call on the separation of the horror film articles. I noticed that Zombie433 or whatever their user name is seems to delete all posts on his or her talk page. On seeing this user actually post prose, he/she doesn't seem to have a great grasp of the english language. How do you think we should approach this user in the future? Cheers. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:27, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bridge Design

Hi. I see that you created Category:Bridge design. I also saw that you deleted Continuous truss bridge from Category:Bridges and added it instead to this new category. Can you join me on the talk page Category talk:Bridge design and discuss what is the defining characteristic you are thinking of for this new category (a definition of what belongs in the category) before moving any more articles. You can add articles that you think belong there, but wait until some consensus is reached before deleteing them from existing categories, like Category:Bridges. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 04:16, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SS Bergensfjord

A nice start, but this article could easily be expanded. For a ship with such a long service life the article is on the short side. Useful sources for merchant ship articles may be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ships/Sources#Merchant_ships, particularly the first two, the Miramar and Plimsoll Ship Data sites. All owners, operators and ship names etc should be in the infobox - see SS Elisabethville for an example of how to do this. Finally, if you're interested in ships, please consider joining WP:SHIPS, just add your name to the members list and you're in! Mjroots (talk) 09:59, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Inwind. I've had a look at the article, expanded it and nominated it at Did you know. I've also switched the photo. For the correct way of using photos from the Norwegian National Library see what I did with the photo you originally uploaded. Using Galleri Nor directly is preferable. Manxruler (talk) 16:33, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Alice Dellal

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 Alice Dellal 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.  Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 18:08, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evans Evans edit

You keep deleting the fact that Velma is half of a couple, but then you leave in the reference to "the pair." Do you read your edits after you make them? --HarringtonSmith (talk) 23:38, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a question: why are you so interested in gutting an already bare-boned article like Evans Evans that needs every little shred of flesh that comes its way? Why not bring your editing efforts to a bloated article, like Dr. Strangelove, which has every item reiterated two or three times? Just curious. --HarringtonSmith (talk) 03:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I try to keep information at the most appropriate place. i.e. content relevant to specific films in the article on the film, biography etc. in the article on the actor. Inwind (talk) 10:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for SS Bergensfjord

Updated DYK query On January 8, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Bergensfjord, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Inwind! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 6 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

  1. Lou Deprijck - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:46, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Goring-on-Thames

You deleted seven links from the "External links" section of Goring-on-Thames. I agree with you that two of them were commercial spam. However the other five are all sports or social organisations that are notable in the village so I disagree with your dismissal of these links as "less relevant". The Wikipedia articles for the majority of other villages in Oxfordshire have an "Amenities" section describing its sports and social organisations. I declare an interest as in most of those articles I wrote those sections. I have therefore created an "Amenities" section for Goring and reinstated the five links as inline citations. I suggest this is a more constructive approach than bulk deletion of external links. Motacilla (talk) 01:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

==[[:File:HornsrevMOELLED RIFT_250.jpg]]==

I moved the image to Commons some time ago, and now someone else tagged it. You may want to have a look. Thanks. Someone might have to follow the procedure in Commons:COM:OTRS if you do not own the copyright to this picture. --Teratornis (talk) 23:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Somerset de Chair

Why do you have a problem with the inclusion of Lady Bristol's persona prior to her 2nd marriage? And to the inclusion of Somerset's son-in-law? Kittybrewster ☎ 14:07, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only if relatives other than wife(s) or children are important for the article they should be included. Just listing these people will make the article more difficult to read. Should these people be noteworthy, a new article could be written and a link added. See also WP:NPF. Inwind (talk) 16:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Both have articles. That is why they have blue links. Lady Bristol was Lady Bristol when she married Somerset and your amendment deletes this important detail. Neither is unknown. Kittybrewster ☎ 18:10, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection 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.

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) 04:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GE Global Research page

Inwind, I work for GE Global Research and wanted to add some information to the page... update it with some information on some of the areas in which we do research, provide links to our official blog (www.edisonsdesk.com), and provide some more information on some of our global locations. I saw that you have recently been active with editing the page and was wondering if you could provide some insight to how I could go about adding this information.

Thanks! Katelyn —Preceding unsigned comment added by KatelynNY (talk • contribs) 17:31, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of List of universities with industrial engineering faculty

I have nominated List of universities with industrial engineering faculty, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of universities with industrial engineering faculty. 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 00:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Edgar Degas

Category:Edgar Degas, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Category Continents

Template:Category Continents has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 11:32, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Portal Renewable energy

Hi. As you created this portal page some time ago, I thought you might be interested in this discussion. --Elekhh (talk) 08:49, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dobrogea Wind Farm

Hi, Inwind. There is a merger discussion of Dobrogea Wind Farm and Fântânele Wind Farm articles. Your opinion is appreciated. Beagel (talk) 11:40, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Failure mode and effects analysis

Category:Failure mode and effects analysis, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Wizard191 (talk) 00:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Loïk Le Floch-Prigent

The article Loïk Le Floch-Prigent has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. E. Fokker (talk) 21:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Birgit Vanderbeke

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Birgit Vanderbeke. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kaido Kaaberma

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Kaido Kaaberma. The community has decided that all new biographies of living persons must contain a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article as per our verifiability policy. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:11, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Armin Rohde

The article Armin Rohde has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. MissAmericaGirl (talk) 21:07, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

December 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Aislinn Derbez, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. MissAmericaGirl (talk) 01:34, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Storm Uru

The article Storm Uru has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Adabow (talk · contribs) 10:08, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article is already referenced. Inwind (talk) 12:16, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Random Smiley Award

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award.
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

♠TomasBat 20:10, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kjetil Borch

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 Kjetil Borch 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. Yaksar (let's chat) 20:21, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Storm Uru for deletion

The article Storm Uru is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Storm Uru 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. Yaksar (let's chat) 20:48, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Caroline O'Connor

Regarding your move of Caroline O'Connor (actress): 1) given the incoming links to Caroline O'Connor, I think such a move was unwise – a hatnote on the actress's page referring to the rower would have been more appropriate and less disruptive; 2) please consider following up your page move by changing all pages that link to "Caroline O'Connor" to point to the appropriate page, as described at WP:UPT and WP:FIXDABLINKS. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All links adjusted. Inwind (talk) 12:09, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. All the best, -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:28, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rita de Jong

The article Rita de Jong has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Zanoni (talk) 09:44, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Anne Kakela

The article Anne Kakela has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Zanoni (talk) 12:45, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Disambiguator's Barnstar
For your great work creating new disambiguation pages. Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 20:21, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Nomination for deletion of Template:Social psychology in textual context

Template:Social psychology in textual context has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:24, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
Great work on checking through so many articles in this CCI Category. I have been hacking away at this for months now (down from roughly 10,000 in September) and I have to admit that I was beyond tired of this work. Maybe the end is not so far away now! Thanks for all you time. SFB 22:41, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Examples of scientific method for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Examples of scientific method 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/Examples of scientific method 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. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 14:41, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

{{Brazil-rowing-bio-stub}}

Greetings! I see you have recently created one or more new stub templates or categories. As it states at Wikipedia:Stub, at the top of most stub categories, and in many other places on Wikipedia, it is recommended that new stub types be proposed prior to creation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals. This helps to reach consensus about whether the new stub type is already covered by existing stub types, whether it is named according to stub naming guidelines, whether it is otherwise correctly formatted, whether it reaches the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, and whether it crosses existing stub type hierarchies. Your new stub type is currently listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Discoveries, where comments are welcome as to any rationale for this stub type. Please, in future, consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature. Grutness...wha? 03:58, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ivan Kirkov

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 Ivan Kirkov 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, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. WWGB (talk) 12:51, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jerzy Jokiel

The article Jerzy Jokiel has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No claim of notability.

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. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 18:37, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the article makes no claims of that. Please EXPAND the article to show he is notable (in prose), or I'll be forced to waste mine and yours time with a full AFD. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 18:53, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Inwind/Archive 1! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Speedy deletion nomination of James Handy

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

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

A tag has been placed on James Handy 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 of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about it 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 you can assert the importance of the subject, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

See the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 21:59, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Božidarka Frajt

I'm posting this message on your talk page because I noticed that you've recently created the new article Božidarka Frajt--The layout of the article makes it very clear.However, I noticed there are some holes that may need filling: the article does not contain in-line citations, and so doesn't follow Wikipedia style guidelines. Jipinghe (talk) 18:38, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Enrique Villén

The article Enrique Villén has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

Unsourced Biography created after Mar 18, 2010

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Ncboy2010 (talk) 20:31, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kung Mawawala Ka (2012 TV series)

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Kung Mawawala Ka (2012 TV series), to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. GrayFullbuster (talk) 12:33, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Revolution (1985 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dave King (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) 10:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Herbstmilch (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Werner Stocker (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) 10:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]