User talk:Jlrobertson

jlrobertson - My full resume is at my web page Jerald Robertson.info. I'm new at this but hope to continue working on Wiki articles as I seem to enjoy it. Any help and advice will be appreciated

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, then place {{Talkback|your username}} on my talk.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback|Jlrobertson}} on your talk.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Neo-Pantheism

I've added some 1906-1917 sources on the talk page. Please incorporate them into the article as you see fit. Cheers! bd2412 T 05:01, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It has been done where appropriateJlrobertson (talk) 12:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Jstone.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Jstone.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

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

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:07, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This has been addressedJlrobertson (talk) 12:47, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Questions/comments should be placed on User talk pages (such as this one) not on user pages.
In response to this misplaced question, yes I object to recreating these pages, unless and until substantial third party coverage can be found for them (per WP:NOTE). At the time I redirected The Great Story it was wholly unsourced. I did not redirect Epic of Evolution (I merely altered an existing redirect), this was done as the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Epic of Evolution. Recreating it without solid evidence that the topic can now be demonstrated to meet with WP:NOTE will likely result in it being re-redirected per that AfD.

Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 18:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2009

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Epic of Evolution. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 17:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Epic of Evolution. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 16:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Hrafn. I greatly appreciate your heart but you really need to be careful and only post content that can be supported by third-party sources. I posted some possible language and sources on the Epic of Evolution talk page. I suggest you run language by a seasoned wikipedian on the discussion (talk) page before posting. Hrafn is a good one to give feedback. MBDowd (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on your Michael Dowd rewrite

Michael asked me to take a look at your rewrite and give comments:

(Such rewrites usually go in a sandbox (a subpage of your userpage, usually called something like User:Jlrobertson/sandbox, rather than in your main user page.)
It is unclear whether EnlightenNext Magazine is a reliable source. I would suggest a more solid source as a primary basis for your article.
It is better to state what "The New York Times Magazine and The Washington Post to the National Catholic Reporter, NPR, the BBC" have to say about him, rather than simply mentioning their coverage. Such sources are far more appropriate basis for an article than EnlightenNext.
Your proposed rewrite relies too heavily on primary sources -- particularly Dowd's writings & websites
Generally, it is better to include information (e.g. from philosophers and theologians) that engage Dowd's ideas in detail, rather than fairly vague or superficial praise (particularly in the case of the 'endorsements', when they are unsourced.
Amazon user reviews are never reliable sources.

Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 04:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Lucille

Hi, I have found your username from the spirituality section. I need your help and suggestion. I am trying to add an article on one of the Living spiritual teacher. but,I am facing an problem.

The editors who have visited this page don't understand spirituality and they have tagged it for deletion. i need your help urgently. so they are trying to compare it with other biographies in the field of sports etc. As you know,the field the spirituality is not very commercial. so I am having a hard time convincing them. could you please help amd and take a look at article. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Francis_Lucille http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Francis_Lucille.

Appreciate all your help.

Thanks Amarhindustani Amarhindustani (talk) 15:41, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I wasn't trying to be libelous. I'm studying theology and the term "radical theologian" is actually used by Alteizer! You shouldn't judge someones motives. I like the term radical theologian and find radical theologians fascinating. My beliefs don't come into it. Sorry for the angry tone but please can you not be so quick to accuse

--613kpiggy (talk) 18:08, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Sorry for being rude. I misunderstood you. I'm just not used to be described as libelous. I'm trying to learn the rules. Thank you.

--613kpiggy (talk) 18:44, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Religious naturalism

Thank you for your kind words and acknowledgement regarding my edits. If there's something you'd like proofread, I'd be happy to take a look. --Cybercobra (talk) 05:20, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Stanley A. Klein

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Stanley A. Klein, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Fails wp:PROF

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. -- Jeandré, 2009-04-05t13:07z 13:07, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An administrator removed the proposed deletion notice before I could address itJlrobertson (talk) 17:35, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Darwin

Re this edit, why not just change {{reflist|3}} to {{reflist|2}}? – ukexpat (talk) 16:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

613 Piggy

613kpiggy – you are not using proper Wiki procedures in your work. Statements must be referenced in line for most editors to accept them. You had best read and reread and adhere to policies or you run the risk of getting your stuff deleted. Just being helpful. It takes a while to get into the proper flow of doing Wiki articles.

An example - you put John Shelby Spong in the religious naturalists category. Do you have a solid reference that allows you to do that??? I'm familiar with his thinking and know people who know him. They tell me he is one however I have no reference in print that allows me to call him a religious naturalist. So how can you. Your analysis may let you come to that conclusion but that is original work 9and your opinion) and not allowed by Wiki policy.

AfD nomination of Stanley A. Klein

I have nominated Stanley A. Klein, 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/Stanley A. Klein. 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. -- Jeandré, 2009-04-19t13:53z 13:53, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Message to Hrafn

I believe my present rewrites of the Epic of Evolution and Michael Dowd show them to be subjects of substance and merit that can stand alone. Both are fully referenced now, maybe not Precisionist so, but decently so. Perhaps more than necessary to counter your past criticism of them. Both have been reviewed by two administrators prior to pasting in.

Thanks for pointing out the use of Users sandboxes – I’m learning

You-“Your proposed rewrite relies too heavily on primary sources -- particularly Dowd's writings & websites” this article now has 71 references, the majority of which are not Dowd’s sites.

You in the past - “Additionally the tone of the proposed rewrite is not particularly neutral -- most glaring example is your recent edit, in the lead no less, calling his wife "acclaimed" – I was using the language of one of the references, deleted it but put it back in with reference and finally deleted it. The references (mostly interviews) to Dowd and his wife are not usually neutral. If I was not interested in a neutral point of view would I add a section on criticism of Dowd? As to my being neutral on evolution, I’m biased like 99% (or 95% depending on reference source) of the world’s scientists. I think it is called main stream, not biased point of view.

I have already had my say about EnlightenNext being a reasonable source for citations. I believe your questioning of it as a reliable source was your opinion and without verifiable merit. Do you have a reliable reference saying different? Because you say something is not a reliable source, does not make that so!

You threatened me –“ you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia”. You are not an administrator and do not have that right! Your wholesale deletion of my last redo of Dowd was not at all proper in my opinion. “Users may be blocked from editing by an administrator to protect Wikipedia and its editors from harm.” - Not for disobeying you.

Wiki policy calls for not biting the newcomers and Civility. I felt bitten and question how civil you were. You have a history of getting negative comments. You have been called malformed, biased, abrupt, uncivil, heavy-handed (your admission), unwikipedian, disruptive, arrogant, infuriating, impolite, lacking in good faith, react with some heat (your admission) and insulting. You have been accused of yelling at other users, attaching them and treating them shabbily.

You spend much of your time on the talk page for some reason. Why is that?

“Wikipedia:Don't be inconsiderate - If a significant number of reasonable people suggest, whether bluntly or politely, that you are being inconsiderate, the odds are good that you are not entirely in the right. If you have been labeled as inconsiderate, especially if you have been told this by several people in a particular community, it might be wise to consider the possibility that it is true. If you suspect that you may be inconsiderate, the first step is to become aware of it. Ask yourself what behavior might be causing this perception. Try changing your behavior and your mode of presentation. In particular, identify the harsh words in your communications and replace them with softer ones.”, “Being right about an issue does not mean you're not being inconsiderate! An inconsiderate person can be right — but they're still inconsiderate!”

My last work on Dowd resulted in a wholesale deletion of everything I added. That was improper. Selective where warranted but not wholesale. You have done this before to others.(“Again, Hrafn, please do not delete entire articles for under-referencing” and “Well, how about you not DELETE AN ENTIRE SECTION without first discussing”). Don’t do this again to me or anyone else.

You like to tell editors to read the policies. I suggest you read these- Wikipedia:Civility - Wikipedia:An uncivil environment is a poor environment - Wikipedia:Ethic of reciprocity - Wikipedia:Don't be inconsiderate - Wikipedia:Assume good faith - Wikipedia:How to be civil - Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers - Wikipedia:Newcomers are delicious, so go ahead and bite them - Wikipedia:Apology - Wikipedia:Source of conflict - Poorly informed newbies - Wikipedia:WikiBullying - Wikipedia:Don't call a spade a spade - Wikipedia:Etiquette - Wikipedia:No angry mastodons - Wikipedia:How to be civil - m:Don't be a dick

Why have I taken so much time to respond to you? First, you pissed me off (not my preferred language but one you have used improperly in my opinion on Wiki pages so you probably understand it better than my ‘ticked off’ term). Second, you bring a perspective and effort to Wikipedia that is badly needed. But you must change your methods otherwise you will burn out or get booted out. You earned a sincere barnstar from me for educating me but you didn’t need to tick me off doing it. So I appeal to you to soften your replies to others and don’t be such a Precisionist and Dick. Wiki is open editing and will never be perfect. It will always need people to keep it on course. Thus it needs you. Just be kind in doing your thing. Moderation in all things.

I give you a challenge – see if you can earn one of these

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar, The Barnstar of Good Humor, The Civility Barnstar or a Guidance Barnstar. Perhaps a Citation Barnstar which is awarded to users who provide references and in-line citations to previously unreferenced articles rather than sitting around sapping people. I will keep tabs on how you are doing.

I have come down on you a bit harsh. I could have sweet talked you but - just making a point – do you get it? Sincerely, let us be cooperative, considerate, co-workers and welcome those who join in. I am going to be a good editor and you pointed me in the right direction. For that I will always be thankful. You earned the barnstar. History is history, a clean slate for now. Sincerely,Jlrobertson (talk) 10:47, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Neo-Pantheism

A tag has been placed on Neo-Pantheism requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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. Ren ✉ 04:09, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

humanjourney.us

Hello,
Why do you add external links to http://www.humanjourney.us/ ? It will probably be an excellent site one day, but at present it only contains the message "CURRENTLY IN DEVELOPEMENT Please check back." Please have a look at WP:EL before adding more external links.
BTW, did you know that you don't need to sign your edits to articles using four tilde (~~~~), only posts to talk/discussion pages.
Thanks --Fama Clamosa (talk) 17:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And why would that introduction change any of this? It is full of...

Visitors will be able...

As they navigate through these stages on the website, visitors will see...

...visitors to The Human Journey website will follow...

This section will consider...

I really can't see why readers would find that site helpful. So why are you adding these links? Are you affiliated with the Institute for the Study of Human Knowledge somehow?

--Fama Clamosa (talk) 20:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding links to this site, per the external links guideline. Thank you in advance. --Ckatz^chat _spy 22:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Religious naturalism title

You can ask User:SoWhy on on their talk page if they could justify and/or reverse the move; their edit summary mentions a move request, but there is no corresponding discussion on the article's talk page, which is unusual.

If they refuse, you can file a Requested Move yourself to have the page moved back.

Also, I am not, nor have I ever claimed to be, an administrator. --Cybercobra (talk) 16:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiBirthday

I saw from here that it's been exactly four years since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:49, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. Ckatz^chat _spy 20:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:3- Michael.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:3- Michael.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 01:25, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wieman, Henry Nelson.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Wieman, Henry Nelson.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files 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. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AFD of article you contributed to

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of new religious movements BigJim707 (talk) 11:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

af

AFD of article you contributed to

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of new religious movements BigJim707 (talk) 11:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Michael Dowd.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Michael Dowd.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. /ƒETCH COMMS / 20:23, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited C. Robert Mesle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Naturalism (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) 11:31, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Brian swimme.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another one of your uploads, File:ConnieBarlow.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 15:10, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Varadaraja V. Raman may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

President of various cultural/social organizations including The Interfaith Forum of Rochester, [India Community Center of Rochester, The Bengali Association of Rochester, the Rochester Tamil

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Karl Peters.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Karl Peters.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:57, 15 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) 13:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Geisha (film)

Hi just a note that you can't just lift summaries wholesale from other websites as that violates copyright. A majority of the content on Wikipedia must be in your own words, with quote marks and attribution for others. For film summaries especially it is preferred that editors write their owns summaries since sites like IMDB are written in a teaser manner and don't cover the plot in an encyclopedic manner (meaning including the main events and ending, and avoiding "analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims") The only case where I think it'd be acceptable is for lost films and even then it's better to summarize the source rather than copy it. Opencooper (talk) 06:11, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Jlrobertson. 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]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Jlrobertson. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Joris-Karl Huysmans 2.jpg

The file File:Joris-Karl Huysmans 2.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Marie Raman.jpg

The file File:Marie Raman.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Rev. M.Dowd.jpg

The file File:Rev. M.Dowd.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Varadaraja_V._Raman, you may be blocked from editing. ∯WBG^converse 06:59, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Attack is baseless. Jlrobertson edits widely in this area, no indication whatsoever of spam or COI. Should be withdrawn. Hyperbolick (talk) 21:21, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Jlrobertson. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Varadaraja_V._Raman, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the COI guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. ∯WBG^converse 06:59, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Varadaraja V. Raman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Varadaraja V. Raman 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/Varadaraja V. Raman 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. ∯WBG^converse 07:10, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article did not get deleted

The article Varadaraja V. Raman did not get deleted. Still there! Hyperbolick (talk) 20:09, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:VvRaman.jpg

The file File:VvRaman.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Michael Dowd for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael Dowd, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Dowd until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]