User talk:Libby norman

Interview for The Signpost

This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (announce) @ 10:07, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Muijen

Hi this is Muijen - feel free to edit and make changes to any and all the pages I started - that is the point of wikipedia anyone can change things! Feel free to add remove anything! As far as I read on wiki site; if you flag it Wikipedia will delete the page. If they do, in that case you might have to start a brand new page. Now that they trying to merge the Nature Reserve he worked so hard on to establish is going to be sold to a water company - I think it is good that the wiki site is available to English speakers as well. Hope you can make the time to make the changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muijen (talk • contribs) 22:21, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Responded on Muijen's talk page. Libby norman (talk) 23:08, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 16:48:36, 23 January 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by 198.89.28.208



198.89.28.208 (talk) 16:48, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Ready for you to check again:)

Responded on Speicer1212's talk page – hopefully right place. Libby norman (talk) 17:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peach basket hat

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Peach basket hat, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.quidecco.com/cgi-bin/cgi_ref_by_path/referer/http_3a_2f_2fen.wikipedia.org_2fw_2findex.php_3ftitle_3dUser_3aLibby_5fnorman_2fsandbox_26amp;ampcurid_3d39465926_26amp;ampdiff_3d618146307_26amp;ampoldid_3d618145968/url/http_3a_2f_2fen.wikipedia.org_2fw_2findex.php_3ftitle_3dUser_3aLibby_5fnorman_2fsandbox_26amp;amp;ampcurid_3d39465926_26amp;amp;ampdiff_3d618146307_26amp;amp;ampoldid_3d618145968/.

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. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:50, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bot removed from page, had picked up test version of article on my sandbox. Libby norman (talk) 11:12, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thank you for your message. They are trying to give "goois natuur reservaat" that he helped create away to a Dutch water winning corporation. I wanted to translate some of the information in Englsh to raise awareness internationally.

Although I have never added anythign to wikipedia and I am kind of new to this. The Dutch paper wrote a call to action to have people add information about heritage and translate it and add it....

Thanks for your suggestions - hope you like the picture!

Muijen (talk) 23:04, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted

Fair enough. Tony (talk) 09:57, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Tam (women's hat)) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Tam (women's hat), Libby norman!

Wikipedia editor Jbhunley just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Very nice article.

To reply, leave a comment on Jbhunley's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elizabeth Handley-Seymour

Hi Libby Norman! Just written up an article on Handley-Seymour and thought I'd drop you a line to see if you fancied adding any content of your own or would be willing to take a quick look through it to see if I made any errors or mistakes before I nominate it for Did You Know?. Best, Mabalu (talk) 12:07, 10 April 2015 (UTC).[reply]

11:26:44, 4 May 2015 review of submission by 73.38.59.62


My goal is to be consistent with the pages for OKCupid and match.com -- same density of cites, same walk of the line between fact and advertising. I thought the initial draft met that standard, but the reviewer disagreed. I hope the redraft gets there, if not could you be a bit more specific in the diagnosis? Thank you.

I have no affiliation with The Right Stuff (other than being a member, and hoping to suggest membership to a few new females in Boston).

David


73.38.59.62 (talk) 11:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

responded on talk page. Libby norman (talk) 12:09, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks Libby --

The NY Magazine ad is a verifiable source for the two historical facts it's cited for, that the company advertised in NY Magazine 20 years ago, and targeted specific universities. Seems like exactly the right thing, true? (I'm a lawyer -- it's common that I can use a specific item of evidence to show one fact, but can't use that same evidence an hour later to show a different fact.)

References 1 and 2 are an alumni magazine for Dartmouth students and alums -- just reporting, right?

I don't understand your request that I look at WP:CITEFOOT -- I did, and that specific section of the page asks that I use < r e f > and < / r e f > which I've done. Elsewhere on the same cites page, it's recommended to use cites to google books -- which I've done. Can you explain further?

Most of my external links are to permanent archives, like Google books, or long-stable archives of magazines, Not all, but most. Where there are cites to ephemeral links, that's intentional, because the article describes current (and evolving) state of the world. What would you recommend?

Thanks

David

73.38.59.62 (talk) 12:31, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That was the help I needed. Thank you. David

WOW! THANK YOU for your further help! David — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.9.220.36 (talk) 18:36, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Ollie(cat)

Hiya, thanks for your review, the articles I found are the only ones mentioning her. She is popular die to her appearance on chat shows esecially Ellen. She is a regular part of Ricky's life. What do you suggest I do regarding articles? Thank you. Adyoo3 (talk) 22:48, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Responded on Adyoo3's talk page. Libby norman (talk) 08:51, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:23:36, 28 May 2015 review of submission by Asiainitiatives


Hi Libby, Thank you for your helpful review. I have shortened the article and made a few amendments, as per your recommendation. Please let me know if you would be willing to have a look at it again. As we are a very small organization, and we haven't been written about in detail.

Asiainitiatives (talk) 18:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edward Rayne picture may have an issue - suggested alternative.

I think there are probably issues with using the current image because it includes another identifiable person (Vivien Leigh). Probably best to use another image that shows Edward Rayne more directly - I've uploaded this one which I think is of good enough quality, full-face and no scope for confusion. I lightly edited it to take out the text around the face to avoid visual distraction. What do you think? Mabalu (talk) 10:57, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mabalu, I think you are right on this. I did consider the issue of showing two people, but wondered if we would get away with it because both subjects are deceased and the source is Rayne's website. I even tried cropping Leigh out but the picture just looked weird, especially as the pot plant positioning behind his head isn't great. Importantly, a full-face would be more in the spirit of a 'fair use' – and better ID, which is useful for the article's value as his physical characteristics were so often remarked on (Sergeant Bilko, etc). This is better than anything else I've seen (the only other usable image I found was English Bridge Union and that was clearly scanned from somewhere else and of very poor quality). Definitely replace and thank you for finding the image. I'm hoping to write up Rayne the company over the course of this week.
By the way, great article on Elizabeth Handley-Seymour – another important female designer who deserves a Wiki page and I never knew a thing about her. Sorry I missed it but I was out of operation pretty much throughout March/April and it somehow slipped off my radar. I'll see if I can add, although it looks very well sourced – did you already nominate it for DYK? Libby norman (talk) 11:16, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, it made it to DYK - as a featured image DYK no less. Mabalu (talk) 11:43, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Edward Rayne.jpg

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Noted and good for deletion, see discussion above. Libby norman (talk) 17:31, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Per Holknekt

Take a look at the article Per Holknekt that I have created. Appreciate it.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:19, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Catherine Havasi article

Hi,

I created the Catherine Havasi draft. I see you're reviewing it. There were a couple objections in the comments. My responses were removed. I just want to be sure you removed them, perhaps to make it easier for you to edit. If you didn't, I should add back summaries. The most important is that the Comment is incorrect which says that the sources don't support all the statements. That reviewer just didn't read carefully enough. I highlighted the sentences in the references that state she was the co-founder and director of OMCS. I also disagree with the WP:Coatracking appraisal. That's an advisory essay that cautions against diversions unrelated to the subject. e.g. John F. Kennedy was a Catholic, followed by an extensive discussion of Catholicism. But here, the explanations were closely related. So, for example, to not have at least a bit of explanation about how ConceptNet works (as described by Havasi in her academic work, making the summary similar to explaining what an author's book is about) and that it tests with the verbal acuity of a 4-year old, which Havasi says has likely not been substantially improved upon, is to give the reader much less context as to her importance in the world of Artificial Intelligence. She created (with a team) one of the world's most advanced AI programs (there are probably 20 sources that state this - I included a just a few.) and without some context, the reader won't understand her significance. So I very much think this is the opposite of Coatracking - the statements I provided gives more insight in Havasi and her work and her significance. They don't divert from the main subject. Thanks, Ed BC1278 (talk) 15:12, 24 June 2015 (UTC)BC1278[reply]

AFC rationale

I saw your comment here, and thought you might want to adjust your wording in the future (no point in going back to that one, IMO). A WP:BIASED source is okay, and we do accept some kinds of sources that might be "promotional". What we really need is an WP:INDY (independent) source. So a travel magazine or a book that is 'promoting' this as a travel destination is okay, but a source paid for or written by a travel-related restaurant association is not so helpful (for demonstrating notability/that we should have an article about this subject; it still might be a reliable source for supporting an individual statement). It's kind of a minor point, but WP:INDY sources might be easier to explain than "promotional" sources.

Happy editing, WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:50, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Responded on WhatamIdoing's talk page. Libby norman (talk) 23:12, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for help with Catherine Havasi article

Thanks for sorting through the various discussions and coming up with a good edit.Edsussman (talk) 00:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Edsussman[reply]

Thanks for your notes Edsussman. I did spot all the previous traffic on the page when I took a look, but had to remove some sections as these contained refs that were interfering with going through the text (refs 1, 2, and so on, weren't in the article but in the comments section). I did pare back to what I felt was the key information here, bearing in mind what everybody had said. There looks to be lots of potential for the article to grow and be improved over time. Best wishes. Libby norman (talk) 08:51, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft for Eugene T. Simpson

Hi Libby, I wonder if you could guide me to producing better source material for Eugene Thamon Simpson, a modern composer and conductor who has performed around the world and is currently the curator for a special collection of Hall Johnson artifacts. I'm in correspondence with Dr. Simpson and he's provided me nearly 30 newspaper clippings and the like, but I don't know how to cite such materials on Wikipedia (properly). Can you advise? Thank you so much! Trumpet4christ (talk) 15:45, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Trumpet4christ, I'll gladly help. The key thing to find your way around is the citing conventions. If you have reliable and neutral sources (it sounds as if you do if these are newspaper clippings, etc), then it is very easy to insert a valid reference into text. There is no requirement for such materials to be available online, provided they are acceptable and properly sourced. So, If you press edit on the page and then pull down the arrow beside Templates (lefthand side). This gives you a menu of possible sources – web, news, book, journal – choose the right one and then fill in as much information as you can. I've just done this on Eugene Thamon Simpson with reference 1 and it looks like this:[1]
The template does the hard work of formatting in the right way, but do fill in as many fields as possible. Also include a name for this reference in Ref Name (bottom left of pop up box) – you can ascribe any name you want – and once you've done that, you can reuse the same source in multiple places if it supports information. The reference will then show a b c and so forth next to it to indicate where it is a source, while the reference in the text will just have one number 1, 2, 3 and so on.
One word of warning, you may have to rewrite in places in order to ensure copy and sources match up – I now always start with the sources and construct the article around them. This can be frustrating if there's information you know to be true, but can't prove, but Wikipedia is always a work in progress and it's better to start small with an impeccably sourced article and then build upon it, even if it takes a bit of time. Hope that helps and do let me know if you need further help. I'm also posting this on your talk page so you have it to refer to more easily. Libby norman (talk) 17:33, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Fitzgerald, Maureen (3 February 1994). "Rowan Choir Set For Utah Special Invitation For Talented Group". Philadelphia Inquirer. Retrieved 6 August 2015.

Thanks for approving my contribution!

Just wanted to thank you for approving the article i'd submitted (IndiaSpend.com). First time contributing articles, which is why I'd accidentally made a request to Articles for Creation instead of creating one myself. Will remember that for next time, thanks again! -Shijithpk (talk) 08:51, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shijithpk and thanks for your message. No problems putting it through Afc, and some editors prefer to do that for the first few articles, but I'd say you have grasped how to construct a well-referenced and informative article and may prefer to create future articles via your sandbox. Well done on a good first article. Libby norman (talk) 09:14, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

18:30:02, 14 August 2015 review of submission by 174.0.101.189


Question: The submission guidelines state: "Appropriate uses

IMDb content which is acceptable to reference on Wikipedia include: 

   Hello. A quick question: The writing credits marked with "WGA" that are supplied directly by the Writers Guild of America (where applicable).
   The MPAA ratings reasons, where they appear, that are supplied directly by the Motion Picture Association of America."

Unless I am reading the IMDB page incorrectly, the films posted were MPAA rated and the credits supplied directly by the MPAA. Did this not qualify as a reliable source or have I misunderstood. Thank you for your time.

174.0.101.189 (talk) 18:30, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for your message 174.0.101.189. I said IMDB was not a good 'standalone source' as in not good enough as a source to support everything in your article. Inline citations was the issue here – and key material in the article, such as the biography, had no reference sources at all, as far as I could see. You will need to add a References section (with reflist underneath) in order to infill references, as currently you only have an External links section, and do check out the link at the top which would explain more about the decline and the reasoning behind inline citations in biographies of living people. Hope that helps. Libby norman (talk) 18:41, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Eugénie hat

Gatoclass (talk) 18:17, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wickstrom's Identity

I appreciate the review, I've revised my submission per your feedback and it's pending re-review. However when I look at the 'pending submissions' page I don't see it there. Just making sure that I've done this process correctly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zwickstr (talk • contribs) 01:26, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thank you for your help last week, Libby. I today just about completed the entry for The Seed Savers' Network. Yet to put up Further Reading and External Links.

Mimosamask (talk) 13:30, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Russell

Biographical details found for the mysterious Peter Russell (fashion designer)! Unfortunately, the V&A researchers had even less luck than we did with finding out anything new about Bianca Mosca... but their new book on British couture is AMAZING and an absolutely knockout gorgeous resource absolutely LOADED with tons of info and details. It really should be linked as future reading on all the relevant biographical pages. Mabalu (talk) 16:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Catherine Havasi

Hi Libby,

You were nice enough to review the Catherine Havasi article I submitted to AfC. Someone has placed a flag on the article, nominating it for deletion, because it's claimed the subject does not meet academic notability guidelines. As you may recall, Catherine Havasi has abundant general notability in addition to academic notability.

Would you mind taking a look? I placed a full explanation in the Talk section Talk:Catherine Havasi in the section "Notability".

Many, many thanks.Edsussman (talk) 19:23, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Edsussman[reply]

Hi, I've just responded on the talk page Edsussman. I agree that this is flag is questionable and propose to give them 24 hours to post on the talk page so we can have a sensible discussion. So if I don't hear back tomorrow I'll be removing the flag. Libby norman (talk) 19:33, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request independent review of draft

Hi Libby,

You were good enough to do an independent review of an article I wrote about Catherine Havasi where I have a COI. I have written a redraft of the stub AlienVault, also in the world of technology. I also have a COI here and the redraft needs an independent review as per WP:COI. The stub has flags for poor citations and tone.

I believe I've addressed these issues and written a much more authoritative article on the company, which runs the largest open source project in the world for computer security threats and has been financed with $116 million.

Since you seem comfortable with the topic of technology and are very thorough, I thought I'd see if you might have the interest and inclination to be the independent reviewer.

The redraft is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BC1278/subpage2 and was written with my primary account (I disclose the alternates on each user page). I've made a COI disclosure on the talk page of the AlienVault article.

Thanks for considering this request.Edsussman (talk) 22:52, 30 November 2015 (UTC)Edsussman[reply]

19:12:42, 13 February 2016 review of submission by Sefdik


Hello Libby, I've been away for a bit and would really like to get the Diss Grammar school article published. I have read you comments, referred to WP:V and WP:NOR and made some small changes which I trust make it more acceptable. I don't see an issue with reference 7. The structure of the whole article is a straight forward list of dates in chronological order about the history of the school. I started by basing the article on that of Diss High School the successor to Diss Grammar School.

Any more detailed help you can give would be very much appreciated.

Seth. /0^0\.

Hi Libby. In regard to a message I received when I visited Wikipedia today, it said an article I have edited was not approved or something along those lines. My confusion being I have never attempted to edit a Wikipedia article (I'm not even sure if I'm using this page correctly). Was this message intended for another user? I'm the only person with access to this computer, so I'm worried about a security breach such as hackers. If you could let me know if the message you sent was for this computer or not so I can look into it and figure out what happened if an article was edited from this computer. Kinda worried I've been hacked! Thanks - Amy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.40.248.36 (talk) 02:23, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amy, this looks to have been a very old edit (November 2014) and as the user is only identified by an IP address you should be fine. There is a message at the top of the talk page that indicates that multiple users may connect to the internet via proxy from this Three IP address. The note also gives guidance on how to establish your own account – a really good idea if you want to contribute to Wikipedia now or in the future. Hope that helps. Libby norman (talk) 09:49, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Libby norman. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Libby norman. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fashion capital

I also found your comment on that article and I can only back your opinion. I came to the article after looking up the term fashion capital and having read other rankings that are backed by high-profile personalities from the industry. Would you support a revamp of the list there? ► robomod 10:44, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Writers' & Artists' Yearbook cover 2003.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Writers' & Artists' Yearbook cover 2003.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:02, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prudence Glynn's first piece for The Guardian

Hello, Libby, I'm Carlos Didjazaá, a fashion journalist based in Mexico City, I've been reading a lot about some historical fashion journalists in the past century and I found the genius Prudence Glynn. Reading her Wikipedia entrance I found this amazing quote "Confronted the other day by a heckle to the effect that I had 'wasted 14 years by only writing about hideous clothes costing ludicrous money for silly women to wear at silly occasions' I naturally took this as a great compliment". I have been trying to find the full article all around the web without success, also, I tried in vain to find a The Guardian issue of that very specific day in local bibliothèques. That's why I'm writing you, after a quick check on the history of that page I found it was you who originally wrote it and added said quote, having said that, is there a way you could send me a pic or scan of that article? It would be so helpful with several investigations I have been doing. Best regards, and thank you. CardidSansa (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:City of Westminster College new logo.gif

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Adrian Greenberg, known as Adrian or sometimes Gilbert Adrian.jpg

⚠
⚠

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:03, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Anne Lise Kjaer for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anne Lise Kjaer 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/Anne Lise Kjaer until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

30Four (talk) 15:04, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]