User talk:JohnRussell
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Devo_20-big.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Devo_20-big.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags.
[edit] Please do not recreate already deleted material
I am not sure if but the Spinnwebe was already voted for deletion with the decision to delete (Spinnwebe AFD).--Jersey Devil 06:31, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] SpinnWebe has been nominated for AFD again
As a heads-up, SpinnWebe has been nominated for AFD a second time at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SpinnWebe. I strongly encourage you to participate in the discussion. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal
I have deleted Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal. Whether an article on this topic should exist in Wikipedia has already been discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal less than a month ago, and the result was that it should not. - Liberatore(T) 17:33, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Tampa Bay and Beyond
Tampa Bay and Beyond has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt this website might not be notable enough for an article. Please review WP:WEB for the relevant guidelines. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.
If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the prod notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. NickelShoe 23:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] License tagging for Image:Xmassuf banner.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Xmassuf banner.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. 03:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 1987
Mate, it really would be helpful if you didn't revert me a few minutes after I've listed the article as a Featured Article Candidate. We're supposed to have stability! The authoratative source is the KLF Discography, which doesn't include BPMs in the track names and imho it's a trainspotter level of detail. Never mind, we'll leave them for now and I'll add a footnote. --kingboyk 19:02, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
As you've probably seen it got promoted :) Sorry for snapping, panic over! --kingboyk 20:20, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Enlightenment?
I noticed that you've added "connected writings on enlightenment" to the Huahujing article again. I'm afraid I don't understand what this phrase means. Is it a quote? Thanks. Keahapana 20:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Red labor
Hi there. I deleted an article you created, Red labor, as failing our criteria for speedy deletion, specifically A7 as lack of notability and G11 as promotional for a small group. Please do not recreate the article, but continue to edit! Teke (talk) 03:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Red labor
Hello JohnRussell,
I apologize for not responding to your message on the article Red labor. I have only been online here a few minutes once every few days for the past couple months, and I did miss your message. This is a communication failure on my part and my apologies once again.
As far as the article goes, I will not participate in the deletion review as the closing admin. I should not have used "blatant advertising" as my summary, instead I should have used promotional. The article as is simple said that:
Red Labor is an artist group run by Josh Bertrand and Dave Rau that was founded in Tampa, FL. They primarily do website and screen printed designs and work in a faux worn look.
[edit] References
- Analogue Part of Cameron Moll's That Wicked Worn Look; tips about starting your next analogue design.
- iStockphoto.com : Articles - Red Labor Presents: Faux Real
- iStockphoto.com : Articles - Know Your Type: Starting points for typographic inspiration;
- Web Standards Awards :: Archive :: Red Labor
- 29th Annual Juried USF Student Art Exhibition Design by Red Labor
- 28th Annual Juried USF Student Art Exhibition Design by Red Labor
- Artist Profile at Tampa Bay and Beyond
[edit] External links
- Official Site
- Iron-On Resistance: Lovely independent art products
There is no notability asserted here, in my opinion, to merit an article. If you would like to recreate the article, by all means do with expansion. As is, the article offers links and references but there is not expansion beyond the definition, and it's hard to search for "Red labor" on the internet. I apologize for the inconvenience, and if the DRV fails by all means make the article again but assert notability. Happy editing to you! Teke (talk) 07:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Clayton Counts / The Beachles
Hi, John. I see that you were a contributor to the Beachles article. Well, it looks like a couple of people are now proposing the deletion of the article I wrote for Clayton Counts. It's currently in debate, and I was wondering if you wouldn't mind casting a vote to keep the article around? Their main concern seems to be that Counts isn't notable, although he clearly meets the Wikipedia eligibility requirements for notability as established in WP:MUSIC. I have provided several more links and references, also. Here's the link to the debate.[1] TrevorPearce 14:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for chiming in over there. The consensus was to keep the article. Sorry to bug you with this, but I have just re-added "Sgt. Petsound's" to the list of notable bootlegs on the mash-up page. This will most probably result in somebody de-listing it, but I have provided reasons for its inclusion on the mash-up talk page. (More than a couple of the bootlegs listed there fail WP:MUSIC for notability, while Counts' does not.) If you wouldn't mind seconding the motion, it may help to keep things NPOV. Thanks for all the trouble. TrevorPearce 16:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- Great... thanks a lot. If you feel like leaving a comment under mine on the talk page, that would probably be enough to discourage some contributors from removing it. I hate to police them, but the article is really very biased in places. TrevorPearce 16:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:The JAMS- 1987-side1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:The JAMS- 1987-side1.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).
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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:The JAMS- 1987-side2.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:The JAMS- 1987-side2.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).
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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 07:08, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:AKR028.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:AKR028.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).
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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 06:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
