User talk:Bouncehoper/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

License tagging for Image:Goofyseniors.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Goofyseniors.JPG. 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. 21:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Deleted category

Please don't add anybody to Category:Disney voice actors. The category has been deleted per a decision at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. Any additions you make to the category will be automatically removed by a bot. You can challenge the decision to delete the category at Wikipedia:Deletion review if you wish. Thanks. -- Samuel Wantman 09:32, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

groovy. thanks. Bouncehoper 02:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Stoopid Monkey Logos

As you are probably aware, the Stoop!d Monkey page was the subject of an AfD and the result was, of course, "Keep". Currently, the logos are a point of contention with myself saying that they were part of the "Keep", while User:Calton saying they were to be dropped and the article was to remain.

I asked the admin who closed the AfD his opinion and he replied, "I just said the article was to be kept, I don't know about the logos". There wasn't a decision given on the logos and in the AfD only 3 users said the logos should go, only 1 said keep the article, lose the logos.

I am not sure how to handle this, but since the admin who closed the AfD made no decision and the AfD wasn't about the logos in the first place (and the majority said to keep the logos if you want to be picky about it, as far as I can tell).

This wasn't an issue from April 16th (immediately after the AfD) to May 3rd when User:Calton realized that I was blocked for 48hours (not related to this) and I couldn't revert his changes. User:Calton had no interest and made no changes on the page itself or the talk page during that time. So, to me, his initial revert on May 3rd was done because of my block.

I have asked two admins (in case one is offline) to revert his changes and put a block on the page until this can be worked out. I am also asking you, since you contributed to the AfD, what your opinion is on just the logos themselves. I appericate you input one way or the other. Thanks...SVRTVDude ^(VT)

Well, I have incorporated the explanations (sentences) of the logos and their respective links into the Robot Chicken episode list. Which I am surprised hasn't already been reverted by User:Calton, but maybe that is a good thing. Take Care....SVRTVDude ^(VT) 00:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Todd Alexander

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Todd Alexander, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest 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. 172.146.132.103 00:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Josh Groban

No problem. I have a lot of patience, and I'm on here all the time working on other articles. I may not revert very often, but I'll revert long after he has lost interest in Wikipedia. He only really has 1 series of things he works in.Sentineneve

MUSTARD

Just to make sure this isn't sarcasm, i haven't really check it in a while...i'm just kind cautious when people ar like "thanks for the help".

If there's no sarcasm, then no prob. I find it stupid that we cant' use sophomore, but can use cover and debut. -^Violask8₁₉₇₆ 03:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Aight, I'm just checking to be clear, ya know? Gotta watch your own back sometimes, haha. I'm always willnig to stand up for whatI see is right, especially on a website. So what if I accidently hurt someone's feelings in Europe? Not that I try to, but ya know what I mean? -^Violask8₁₉₇₆ 15:52, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Apologies

I must apologize for my rather abrupt edit summary here. I have no right to assume you wrote that section. My concern has to do with notability and BLP concerns. Even if something is true and sourced, it isn't necessarily encyclopedic. Whoever wrote that section seems to have selectively (a POV vio) chosen the weird stuff that places Josh in a bad light, while leaving out other stuff. All in all it's mere trivia and hardly worth attention here. -- Fyslee/talk 18:05, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:StayingFat.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:StayingFat.jpg. 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:

Your edits at {{Jars of Clay}}

Hi Bouncehoper. I noticed you removed all of the dead links on the Jars of Clay template. they were placed in there intentionally (by me) in order to encourage users to create the necessary pages. This is a standard practice:

This page in a nutshell: Create red links to needed, unwritten topics. Removal of red links for nonexistent topics should not be done without careful consideration of their importance or relevance.

As you can see, the singles in question are relevant and are likely to have articles created for them (I intend on making some, but I know others will also create some pages for them).

I don't mean to come down on you about this, but just thought I'd explain up front rather than start an edit war. Be well! --linca ^linca 03:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Personally I agree. I think it looks shoddy too, but that's kind of the intention. I do it as much to prompt myself as much as to prompt others to create the pages in question (mind you, I've created more pages than the average wikipedia... about 2000 or so). --linca ^linca 04:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Nice work on those pages! It seems people have already gotten onto them and added more onto them. Not as many to do now! I've done all of the member pages in the last few days (prior to this, their pages all redirected to Jars of Clay). PS: I've added these as pages you've created on your user page. --linca ^linca 01:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Trapp

Thanks, the newspaper online archives are amazing. For free you get the Lede paragraph, and I pay for the NY Times. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 22:22, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Maladroitweezer.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Maladroitweezer.jpg. 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:

Fair use disputed for Image:2gether MTV Original soundtrack.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:2gether MTV Original soundtrack.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Bouncehoper 02:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Robbie Williams

Hi!
Rumours and irrelevant pieces of information -let alone unsourced ones - in an encyclopedia are highly unprofessional. Besides WP relies on FACTS only. Please see talk page.--Fromgermany (talk) 09:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi! You didn't understand my edit at all!

Bouncehoper (talk) 21:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Frankie Valli

Why do you revert my edits? This was a legitimate compromise, as submitted by some other user. You act as if you know the man or all about his life. Chances are, you don't, so stop being involved with it, if that's the case. 70.101.160.105 (talk) 16:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, aren't we sweet. Bouncehoper (talk) 21:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I may have been at least a little rude, and I'm sorry. But please don't resort to name calling anymore. I would appreciate it. 70.101.160.105 (talk) 21:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Um, what name-calling? That was actually sarcasm, hon.

Bouncehoper (talk) 21:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

"Mr./Ms. Attitude". 70.101.160.105 (talk) 21:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, that. That's just calling it like I sees it. There's no reason to fly off the handle when someone edits a page you've been following.

Bouncehoper (talk) 21:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Responding to your last message, no. I don't think that everyone is quite settled on the birthdate issue, therefore the compromise mentioning the two birthdates really should stay. 70.101.160.105 (talk) 02:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

That is just one person's opinion, and no one responded to it. If someone has a copy of the birth certificate, that will prove his true birthdate once and for all. 70.101.160.105 19:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

And furthermore, IMDb is not always accurate, and I doubt everything is thoroughly checked before being posted on IMDb.com. Here is just one instance (I have more). Someone updated the IMDb page on Robert Earl Jones (actor James Earl Jones's father), who died a year ago, and it showed his birthyear as 1904. Meanwhile, he could not have been born in 1904 because his obituaries say he 96 when he died, and the Social Security Death Index indicates his birthyear as 1910. There's even more in IMDb's inaccurate history, if you'd like to hear some more. 70.101.160.105 19:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

What is one person's opinion? I saw a compromise on the talk page that he WAS born in 1934. I don't see just one person saying that.

And why would anyone have a copy of his birth certificate? Does that really float around the internet? Hell, I don't know where exactly where MINE is, for cryin' out loud. I fail to see how the copy of his mug shot does not suffice for this.

And contrary to what you believe, IMDb is usually quite accurate. Unlike some places *coughcoughwhere we are right now*, they do not instantly post whatever you send them. They do check everything to the best of their abilities (as no one is perfect, hon), and information that's been changed or added does not always show up for a few weeks, if not longer. Whoop dee damn doo about Robert Earl Jones. Seriously. And why, if IMDb is so "inaccurate", do we list it on possibly every page having to do with actors/directors/movies/etc.? We have an actual format for their links. This must mean we actually trust their content...unless you don't trust the Wiki community to handle such things?

Bouncehoper 18:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

IMDb is a reliable source for some things (i.e. film credits), but NOT very reliable for things such as biographical information. For instance, I checked yesterday and it said there that Cathy Cavadini was born June 1, 1967. No other source, unless it borrowed from IMDb, says that she was born on that date. A thorough search through government public records will prove that she is 46 and was born April 21, 1961. The idea that she was born June 1, 1967 must have been invented. This all has to do with IMDb.com itself, and nothing to do with Frankie Valli. This is just for the record. 70.101.160.105 (talk) 19:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

A few random examples (especially ones no one has really heard of) do not a case against IMDb make. And again, people make mistakes; do you have any idea how many random errors I could find on Wiki?

And just for the record, IMDb was proven correct on Frankie Valli (whom most have actually heard of; who the heck is Cathy Cavadini????) His own homepage says 1934. So in this case they are correct, and, in fact, in most cases they are.

And why the crap are you going through public records for these people? That's kinda creepy...

Bouncehoper (talk) 11:32, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I followed the "public record" link you have on Cathy Cavadini. Looks like you do "faulty" research as well. A. When it pops up, it says you actually searched for the birthdate you were looking for. That's circular reasoning and illogical. Ergo, it proves nothing.

B. This site, "peoplefinders.com", appears to be total crap and not actually government-run. Not only that, but your own "research" seems to show that this Cavadini chick married someone named Hawke. Does this jibe with your definition? Because there is no mention of a husband, much less one named "Hawke" on her page.

Bouncehoper (talk) 11:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

T. Story

Hi,

The article, which is in a poor state, does mention her reign as Miss Nevada -- "...where she was crowned Miss. UNR and then Miss. Nevada in 2000." Also, check the sources labeled "Miss America." For this reason, I would give the article time to develop if I were you, but you are free to list it at Articles for Deletion if you wish. Best wishes, Xoloz (talk) 08:35, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah. Very hard to see while wading through the utter crap on the page. Don't see any real development on here, and not sure if anyone will bother to fix it. I'll give it time, but seriously? If no one does anything, I don't see the point of keeping a piss-poor page on Wikipedia. Do we have EVERY Miss State ever on here? I fail to see the point of it, but if that's the case, then it would be ok to keep her on. If not, I still fail to see what's "notable" about her, since, sheesh, how many Miss Nevadas have there been?

Thanks!

Bouncehoper 18:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

User talk:70.101.160.105

Unfortunately, imdb is not a reliable source, as they take whatever anybody sends them with very little research. Corvus cornix_talk 03:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

And wherever did you get this silly notion? Response above.

Bouncehoper 18:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I don't see any such response above. And why would you label my comment as "silly"? What makes you think that what I'm saying isn't true? It's a long-established dictum on Wikipedia that imdb data is not reliable. But see IMDB is like WIKIpedia. It can be updated by any Joe-Schmoe, there is no IMDB hired updaters. So, you or I could join and edit anyone's profile to say they are in any movie we want, and it would stay there until someone came along and edited it., IMDB is not known as the "incorrect movie database" for no reason, Wikipedia is still far more reliable than imdb.com. ... Updating imdb is damn near impossible, while a bunch of volunteers are generally quick to fix incorrect info on wikipedia. , the IMDb info is incorrect ... I'm curious to know *who* is updating IMDb with this information, [1], Idiots need to stop updating IMDB with B.S. just to get a reaction. Need more? Corvus cornix_talk 21:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant my response was in the "Frankie Valli" section, as that's, I'm assuming, where your comment came from. I didn't actually say your comment was silly--I said the idea that IMDb is unreliable is silly.

How interesting that you use wholly unreliable sources to prove how unreliable this particular source is...someone's livejournal, and a bunch of messageboards. Right.

IMDb does not instantly upload everything that's posted; in fact, one must submit information in the correct manner before it is reviewed by editors: Please see where it says, "{i}f our editors can't positively understand the reason for your request, they won't be able to apply the changes." It takes awhile to put updates on the site, because they are being evaluated to the best of abilities , unlike Wikipedia, which, while there are many who catch mistakes, just like IMDb, there will be pages that sit for awhile with mistakes. And, just like Wiki, it's not going to be perfect Please see the first two sentences.

I haven't found anywhere on Wiki where it blatantly says or has been debated that IMDb is unreliable. If there is such a place, please let me know. And again, I question, if it's so "unreliable", why do we have a special IMDb format for our links to movies, TV shows, and the like?

Thanks!

Bouncehoper (talk) 07:43, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

A few more things: I find it ironic that you contradict yourself when discussing reliable sources. First you state, "So, you or I could join and edit anyone's profile to say they are in any movie we want, and it would stay there until someone came along and edited it," then turn around and say, "Updating imdb is damn near impossible." So which is it?

Also, a lot of "idiots" update Wiki "with B.S. just to get a reaction" as well; in fact more so than IMDb, where you need to actually be a registered member before updating.

I do actually know about this stuff because I am a registered member of IMDb. I don't "randomly" update IMDb because I'm an "idiot" or have a "vengeance" or anything. I update it when I find information that needs to be corrected or added. Then I patiently wait a few weeks while they double-check, and then they post my updates. That's how it works. Truthfully, it's a better system than Wiki, but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop helping Wiki, either.

Bouncehoper (talk) 07:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Hope

Hi Bouncehopper- The history section for Hope doesn't have any information beyond the fact that it was founded by Van Raalte and when it first admitted women. The year of the first graduating class is not even given. There's a lot of information that can be added, including, but not limited to: the change of Hope from essentially a Dutch-speaking college to an English institution around 1900, the presidency of Gerrit Kollen and the rapid expansion of Hope at that time (including the building of what is now Voorhees, Graves, and other important buildings that are no more, such as Van Raalte Hall and Carnegie gym), the building of Dimnent Chapel on the eve of the great Depression, the rapid expansion of the college post World-War II, the presidency of Calvin VanderWerf in the 1960's which attempted to make the college more liberal and ultimately failed, the presidency of Gordon VanWylen in the 1970's and early 1980's and the controversial firings of non-Christian professors, the huge campus-wide protests over mandatory chapel attendance in the 1960's which resulted in many students being suspended and drated to fight in the Vietnam War, the building of DeWitt as a student center complete with a bowling alley, the burning of Van Raalte Hall in the 1980's which resulted in DeWitt being taken over for adminstrative use, the gradual change from Hope as essentially a feeder for Western Sem in its early history to a more secular lilberal arts school, something about the history of Hope's relationship to the RCA, etc. etc.

I don't think I would make a Janet Chandler page- it's a interesting case but it's unknown outside of Hope and West Michigan. It sounds harsh, but there are thousands of people murdered every day and we can't create wiki pages for all of them. If you or somebody else want to create a page, it wouldn't bother me, but it's not something I will be working on. Pianoguy (talk) 17:14, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

David López (actor)

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article David López (actor), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 22:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Mayteana Morales

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Mayteana Morales, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 12:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Tram-Anh Tran

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Tram-Anh Tran, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 12:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Notability

I was going on the notability guidelines as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_%28people%29 -- if you feel the prods are in error, please remove them, but i am not sure they meet the guidelines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.186.172.75 (talk) 15:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

User talk:70.186.172.75

Hiya. Just thought I'd bring your attention to WP:BLANKING, which states that a user is allowed to blank their own talk page, or remove specific comments/warnings, if they so wish. Thanks. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 10:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

whoops! i screwed up. i've always been yelled/seen yellings about not removing info from talk pages. my bad. Bouncehoper (talk) 03:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

No big deal. It's not like a blockable offence or anything. Just thought I'd bring it to your attention. It's not a policy which I personally agree with, but we all have to live by the rules. :) Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 15:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Stop Vandalizing My Page.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLANKING#Removal_of_comments.2C_warnings -- Policy does not prohibit users from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. Deleted warnings can still be found in the page history. 70.186.172.75 (talk) 16:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

No prob. Everyone makes mistakes. Cheers. 70.186.172.75 (talk) 15:43, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

James Baldwin

Sorry, I haven't checked my account for over 2 months, so I've only just discovered your warning to me regarding my "vandalism" of the James Baldwin(writer) article on December 16, 2007. If you review the history of that page, you will find that the anonymous editor preceding my edit had inserted the word "penis" before "Pulitzer Prize." James Baldwin did not win a penis Pulitzer Prize, he won a Pulitzer Prize, and my edit revised the article to reflect that fact. Was there a procedural problem with my edit? I fail to comprehend the possibility of vandalism in the removal of an unnecessary and childish reference to a penis.

thanks,

LicenseAppliedFor (talk) 03:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

reply at your page! :) Bouncehoper (talk) 04:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Momentoftruth.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Datruthandfriendslive.jpg)

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

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Flame.jpg)

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

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Theincrediblewalkphanatik.jpg)

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

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Truevibedebut.jpg)

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

Image:Anchorseniors.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Anchorseniors.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. Kelly ^hi! 17:32, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Album covers

I noticed you reverted my removal of album covers on True Vibe, Da’ T.R.U.T.H., Phanatik and FLAME. I advise you to read Wikipedia:Non-free content before adding any more album covers to. Specifically read Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images for acceptable uses of album covers and Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images_2 for unacceptable uses of album covers.

In the case of True Vibe, the album cover is being used to show the band not the album against "Cover art: Cover art from various items, for identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary)." In the cases of Da’ T.R.U.T.H., Phanatik and FLAME, the album covers are being used in discographies which goes against "The use of non-free media in galleries, discographies, and navigational and user-interface elements generally fails the test for significance (criterion #8). Given below are further examples of images that, if non-free, may fail to satisfy the policy: 1. An album cover as part of a discography, as per the above." Aspects (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Please learn to write before you edit further. Thank you.

Bouncehoper (talk) 03:22, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Datruthandfriendslive.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Datruthandfriendslive.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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 05:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Momentoftruth.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Momentoftruth.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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 05:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Theincrediblewalkphanatik.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Theincrediblewalkphanatik.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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 05:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Truevibedebut.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Truevibedebut.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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 05:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Flame.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Flame.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 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 05:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Ironmancrutcher.jpg)

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

Proposed deletion of Jeremy Horn (singer)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Jeremy Horn (singer), 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. tomasz. 10:56, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Piracy participation update

Hello Bouncehoper/Archive 1,

WikiProject Piracy is currently undergoing some updates and changes, and we are trying to find out who is still active in the project. You are currently listed as a participant on the list of participants, and we would like for you to update your status. Please move your name to the section that best describes your activity in the project:

Active - still active and interested within the scope of the WikiProject.
Semi-Active - still active on Wikipedia, but not as active in regards to the WikiProject.
Former Members - a catch-all classification for those editors who are not active on Wikipedia, those that are still on Wikipedia, but no longer part of this WikiProject, or those that have otherwise not moved their names to another classification yet.

Thank you,
Adolphus79 (talk) 16:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Template:The Offspring

Why are you creating a new template? We already have one at Template:TheOffspring. I wouldn't waste your time with this! Cheers Nouse4aname (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Honey, that one is BROKEN! I am fixing it. Some part of the coding's been f'ed up.

Bouncehoper (talk) 15:16, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

AH! You have fixed it! Thank you! I was attempting to recreate it, since I couldn't figure out what the problem was...

Bouncehoper (talk) 15:18, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

It's usually easier to look at the history of the template and just revert to the last version that worked properly. It's usually someone adding something in the wrong place or forgetting to add a } or something! Nouse4aname (talk) 15:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Huh? That's what I was trying to do. I couldn't find the problem, so I was attempting to fix it another way.

Bouncehoper (talk) 15:21, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Liquid (Jars of Clay song)

I have nominated Liquid (Jars of Clay song), 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/Liquid (Jars of Clay song). 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. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 01:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Love Song for a Savior

I have nominated Love Song for a Savior, 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/Love Song for a Savior. 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. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 01:17, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.