User talk:Sir Paul/archive 1

Image copyright tag missing

Hello, we're working hard to add image copyright tags to every image so that the copyright status is not ambiguous. I'd appreciate it if you could add the appropriate copyright tag to these images:

Image:UniversityofOxford2.jpg

Jeff 08:59, Jun 2, 2004 (UTC)

Iamblichus

Hi, I've done a lot of work on the Iamblichus (philosopher) article you started and am fishing for a little peer review. If you are interested, look it over and any comment would be appreciated. Otherwise, thanks --DanielCD 15:32, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Unverified images

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

Image:IgnacyJanPaderewski.jpg

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 21:25, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

By all means, follow your intuition and tag accordingly. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 03:36, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

Likewise, please take a look at these and tag appropriately. Thanks, Kbh3rd 01:00, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Image:Makingpottery.jpg

seems to be working fine for me. Are you sure it wasn't a temporary problem? Or maybe just at your end?

Seemingly a temporary problem. Sorry. Sir Paul 14:43, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

Regional notice board

You are wellcome to join the Argentine regional notice board. -Mariano 17:29, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

Project!

I am kindly inviting you to join our new project page!

--Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 17:18, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image source/licensing for Image:Bunge.jpg

The image you uploaded, Image:Bunge.jpg, has no source information. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, ie in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. Unless the copyright status is provided, the image will be marked for deletion on 24 October 2005.

This message notification has been automatically sent by NotificationBot managed and run by AllyUnion. Please leave comments regarding bot operations at AllyUnion's talk page. Please direct all comments regarding licensing information at Wikipedia talk:Images for deletion. --NotificationBot 13:22, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Sir Paul, always nice to hear from someone who seems to agree with you completely! ;) At least, on one little topic... Yeah, MichaelSirks has done a good job of doggedly hanging in there, and dodging the three-revert rule, all to support that stupid DCSD timeline and HAN quote. The Lomborg article is a mess... One gambit that might shake things up a bit is to start a HAN article. I was gonna do that a while back, but...didn't have time. Too hard. But if it got going, MS might have to divide his energies between two fronts... Wear him down. I dunno, it's all pretty odd and silly, but that's the way of Wikipedia. You gotta love it... Later on. --Tsavage 01:05, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dershowitz

The number of plagarized citations has changed for the third time. Can you please cite the source? Lotsofissues 06:41, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:JoseOrtegayGasset.jpg

Looks like someone is about to delete Image:JoseOrtegayGasset.jpg for lack of copyright info. You uploaded it, so I figure there is a fair chance you'll be able to remedy this. -- Jmabel | Talk 10:22, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

USA to Argentina

¡Saludos, compañero de Wikipedia! I'm coming to Argentina soon and wanted to see if any of my fellow Wikipedians were interested in meeting up, etc...I'm flying into BsAs on Jan. 25th and I don't know many people there, so if you'd be into talking/getting together, let me know. (BTW, cool user name, wish I thought of it myself.) Feel free to leave a message on my user page...seeya around - Paul 22:22, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Too bad you're not in BsAs...although Toronto is a pretty awesome place. Ciao Paul 01:22, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is "extraordinarily uninhibited" POV?

Hi. You removed a link from the article on Brian Leiter which I had labelled as a "sample of Leiter's 'no bullshit' blogging featuring extraordinarily uninhibited attacks on Glenn Reynolds and Michelle Malkin" with the comment "removing POV link". I was aware when I wrote that label that "extraordinary" was likely to be controversial, but thought that "extraordinarly uninhibited" was more accurate and informative than "uninhibited", particularly for that particular posting. Clearly you disagree. I'm still trying to get a feel for the boundaries here, so I wonder if you would have accepted just "uninhibited"? Is English-style ironic understatement like that appropriate? I'd value your response.

Anyway, I have reinstated the link with quotes from it in place of words about it. Hope you approve. Chris Chittleborough 03:46, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. --TJive 21:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kamm worked with the party for years and is still broadly supportive. If you have evidence of him quitting, I would like to hear it. In the meantime, I reworded the section to reflect your assertion, which you could have done rather than delete large chunks of sourced material. --TJive 22:06, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kamm has regularly described his activities with Labour. If you are seriously contesting this I am sure I can find ample references in his blog. In any case, I can only assume you are familiar with revert policy and do not intend to break it. Given that you are being completely uncivil, I will not hesitate to report a violation. I'd encourage you reevaluate your behavior in this regard. Thanks. --TJive 22:12, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an administrator. I'm saying I will report you to administrators if you break revert policy. I did not see any other warnings on your page, so I gave you one. If you were wise, you would comment on the subject of the matter, and do it on the relevant talk page, rather than continue personal insinuations. Also, "hit piece" was a comment on the material and its tone, not on you. I didn't particularly care who started putting those assertions in; they aren't appropriate. --TJive 22:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Collateral damage

I didn't block you as such, but you must have been hit by another IP block. My block log doesn't have any recent IP blocks (ie. the last few days), and you've edited other entries since the message to my talk, so I guess it's OK now. Thanks. Harr o5 22:18, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That should be fine now. Harr o5 22:37, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions[1] made on July 3 2006 (UTC) to Oliver Kamm

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

The duration of the block is 3 hours. William M. Connolley 07:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Visitors interested in this controversy can click here for some background. Sir Paul 06:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

source, author and permission for uploaded image

Dear Sir Paul, a while ago you uploaded la:Imago:Sir Paul.jpg. Could you please specify the author of the image (probably a friend of yours), the source (probably self-made) and the permission (e. g. PD, GFDL, etc.)? Thanks! -- la:Usor:UV 22:49, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Left-libertarianism

Do you subscribe to the philosophy, or are you just interested in the topic? Jessesamuel 14:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Hume.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Hume.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. Kevin_b_er 00:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, sorry. I had created the new subpage for this image, but did not include the subpage on the main page. At this time, however, its been included and you can see it on that page. Kevin_b_er 23:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Popper.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Popper.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --85.160.27.169 13:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Libertarian socialism

I think my personal philosophy is largely in line with left-libertarianism, with the emphasis on left. I don't know the intellectual background very well, but I'm reading Paine's Common Sense as a starting place. Are you politically active? E-mail me if you prefer a different forum to discuss this topic - jschris gmail Jessesamuel 20:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Boston Tea Party

Howdy, I noticed that you and I seem to post in one or two articles dealing with progressive issues in political science/sociology. There's currently a debate beginning in Boston Tea Party as to whether the article should include the category [2]. It meets definitions set in the articles Terrorism and Definition of terrorism, however, there are several self-proclaimed patriots who watch BTP who refuse to recognise the fact. The simple criteria for terrorism generally seem to be intimidation or destruction of property in order to change public policy or public opinion while a state of war has not yet been declared. Some users would rather use recent acts of terrorism as a yardstick, rather than using a firm definition, and hence lose their ability to discuss matters calmly. Would you be able to pop in to the Talk page and join in the discussion? Thanks much, samwaltz 05:20, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ralph Henry Carless Davis

Hi. Can I ask why you removed 'Professor' from in front of the subject's name? Are you following some convention I don't know of? No reason was given in the edit comment. AWhiteC 00:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Dictionary of Biography

Hi, Sir Paul - you seem to like editing articles about famous Australians from the past. I wonder if you would like to take a look the project page Wikipedia:Australian wikipedians' notice board/Complete to-do/Australian Dictionary of Biography (Shortcut: WP:ADB) and see if you could help out to edit or create new articles. Thanks. - Diverman 02:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Hastings Sibley

Hello Sir Paul, would you upload the picture HenryHastingsSibley.jpg into commons please? That would be very nice. --89.59.209.79 21:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Sir Paul 19:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you --89.59.195.29 19:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

World Transhumanist Association

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article World Transhumanist Association, 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. RJASE1 ^Talk 02:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. You seem to have removed the deletion tag, though. What's going on? Sir Paul 02:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - I hadn't realized it had been through an AfD before. It's up for AfD again for lack of sources or notability claim. Sorry for the mistaken prod notice... RJASE1 ^Talk 02:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Journal of Evolution and Technology

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Journal of Evolution and Technology, 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. RJASE1 ^Talk 03:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Karl Marx's Theory of History (Cohen).gif

This file may be deleted.

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

If 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 16:07, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Making Sense of Marx (Elster).jpg

This file may be deleted.

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

If 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 03:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yew-Kwang Ng

Dear Sir Paul: On Yew-Kwang Ng, which you created and is long overdue, any tips on published and reliable sources for the interesting anecdotal material included? If it is does not satisfy WP:VER, those nuggets are at risk. My thx. --Thomasmeeks 13:05, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:Analytical Marxism (Roberts).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Analytical Marxism (Roberts).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 02:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:GEMoore.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:GEMoore.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 17:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Anarchist Thinkers

A tag has been placed on Template:Anarchist Thinkers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a template that is divisive and inflammatory.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[Talk:Template:Anarchist Thinkers|the article's talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Skomorokh ^incite 05:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Anarchist Thinkers

Template:Anarchist Thinkers has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Skomorokh ^confer 13:21, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: Image:AlexanderBain.jpg

Image:AlexanderBain.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Alexander Bain (Philosoph).jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Alexander Bain (Philosoph).jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 19:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of 100 Worst Britons

An article that you have been involved in editing, 100 Worst Britons, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/100 Worst Britons. Thank you. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 22:46, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I just removed the copyrighted list. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 21:31, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 100 Worst Britons

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article 100 Worst Britons, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Not notable.

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. THF (talk) 17:50, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the prod. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 21:32, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Source of File:WilliamPaley.jpg

Greetings, could you please clarify the source of this image? Thank you much. - Roy Boy 22:55, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:GeorgeGrote.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:GeorgeGrote.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for File:Ludvig lindstrom.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Ludvig lindstrom.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. 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) 01:05, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:KarlJaspers.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:KarlJaspers.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will 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. J Milburn (talk) 18:23, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Roberto Gargarella

The article Roberto Gargarella has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced and probably non-notable BLP.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kurepalaku (talk) 14:11, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 80000 Hours, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Humphreys (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) 11:13, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:TheodorLeschetizky.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

File:TheodorLeschetizky.jpg

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 09:27, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William MacAskill, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Brooks (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) 11:33, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

In order to avoid suspicion of WP:COI, perhaps you should note in David Pearce's deletion discussion that you are currently referenced by name in David's biography. -- flyingkiwiguy (talk) 19:51, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing my attention to this. I have removed all references to this "Abolitionist Society", which is not a real society and with which I'm not involved. (I can provide further details about it in a private email, if needed.)

No problem, no email necessary. The article is definitely improved. I still don't see enough evidence that he's notable, but of course it is clear we're on either side of the final AfD consensus. -- flyingkiwiguy (talk) 19:11, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WLC Debate List - Broken Link

Please fix. This seems to work: http://www.stafforini.com/blog/william-lane-craig-a-complete-list-of-debates/ Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 13:27, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill the Cat. Could you clarify your request? You mention a broken link but everything seems to be working fine. Thanks. Pablo Stafforini (talk) 18:20, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. Never mind. By the way, nice list. Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 19:06, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Making Sense of Marx (Elster).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Making Sense of Marx (Elster).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) 17:26, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Karl Marx's Theory of History (Cohen).gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Karl Marx's Theory of History (Cohen).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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 27 July 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) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William MacAskill, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Brooks. 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) 09:14, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. NeatGrey (talk) 02:16, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of The Superior Human?

Hi, I saw you created an article of Richard D. Ryder. There is an initiative to delete a film Ryder participated. Would be good to have your opinion. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Superior_Human%3F Fn2gf3431 (talk) 08:04, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please claim your upload(s): File:University of Oxford, view from church.jpg

Hi, This image was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices, Thank you.

However, as part of ongoing efforts to ensure all media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed it would be appreciated if you were able to confirm, that it was your own work, by marking it as {{own}}, amending the {{information}} added by a third party, and by changing the license to an appropriate "self" variant. You can also add |claimed=yes to the {{media by uploader}} tag if it is present to indicate that you've acknowledged the image, and license shown (and updated the {{information}} where appropriate).

This will assist those reviewing the many many "free" images on commons that have not yet been transfered to Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:38, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sir Paul. 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.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Sir Paul. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Sir Paul. 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, Sir Paul. 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 Global Priorities Institute

The article Global Priorities Institute has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no third party references or other indications of notability

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 02:24, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I am traveling at the moment and don't have regular access to a computer, but hope to be able to improve the article on my return, in five days. Pablo Stafforini (talk) 19:58, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Bodole (talk) 13:55, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. I just posted my summary of the events. Pablo Stafforini (talk) 15:11, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hilary Greaves for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hilary Greaves 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/Hilary Greaves 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. David Gerard (talk) 20:23, 1 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) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Known for..."

In order to be "known for" something, the thing has to be itself well-known, and the person has to be well known for inventing it. The easiest way to demonstrate this is through reliable independent secondary sources that say the person is known for the thing. A primary source doesn't cut it, especially when it's effectively self-published. I find only two pages of Google hits, none of which qualifies as an independent reliable sources, so this fails as a well known thing and fails as a thing for which he is well known. Guy (help!) 22:50, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JzG, Can you please point me to the part of the Infobox where it is stated that Bryan Caplan is "known for" the "Ideological Turing test"? Pablo Stafforini (talk) 23:24, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve The Precipice (book)

Hello, Sir Paul,

Thank you for creating The Precipice (book).

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Nice work on this article!

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Samf4u}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Samf4u (talk) 14:41, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Toby Ord, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Broome (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 12:52, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding "The Precipice"

Did you get permission to copy and paste the text of this EA Forum post into the article you wrote? If so, the copyright owner needs to be okay with it being used under Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0 (see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials). If not, the article needs to be rewritten to avoid a copyright violation. Qzekrom (she/her • talk) 04:47, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm the author of the EA Forum post (Matthew van der Merwe), and am OK with it being used under Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0 Vermeer dawn (talk) 10:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]