User talk:DickClarkMises/archive5

Your GA nomination of Independent Women's Forum

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Independent Women's Forum you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. TreveX^talk 02:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I've put some stuff in on Title IX and have also expanded the lead section with some stuff on gender/equity feminism and new links. Before I proceeded with the end of the review (things are really shaping up now!) I just wanted to check that you're happy with these edits? TreveX^talk 12:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Libertarianism

Your assistance would be appreciated over at this article, if you have the time and the inclination. Thanks. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 22:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Sharon Harris

"because new image isn't as clear as old one, and has sourcing problems"

Why do you say it's less clear? Admittedly, I may be biased as I saw her just a couple of days ago and don't believe she looked much like the existing/previous photo at all. Actually there is one I have that's even more like her, but it's blurred as she was energetically waving her arms around (I'm seriously tempted to put that one up on LPedia.org).

As for the sourcing concern, I believe I have now stated the sourcing as unambiguously as possible on Wikipedia, as the template to do the job obviously wasn't enough for somebody. If I can make it stronger short of scans of signed affidavits of witnesses I'd like to know how. 8) -- Strangelv (talk) 23:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

User Page

A couple of years ago you welcomed me (thanks) and left the usual note. Now I need a little help. Genuine comments are being left on my user page, but they are not viewable in anything but the comparative history or in editing mode. I have obviously done something wrong/missed something. Can you have a look and see what's happening? Thanks for your time. --Richhoncho (talk) 20:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I got it :) SQL^{Query me!} 21:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good articles newsletter

Delivered by the automated Giggabot (stop!) 01:23, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the kind words of welcome. I look forward to bumping into you on various articles. I am focusing on free market environmentalism for the time being. Bonitammmm (talk) 22:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: LewRockwell.com

Honestly, I was not thinking in terms of anarcho-capitalism, I had the more traditional anarchist hordes in mind. More honestly, I was reacting to the unilateral actions of the anonymous user who added or changed the categories. Certainly, in terms of anarcho-capitalism, the cat fits, but if we are talking about the bulk of what passes for an anarchist movement in this country, Lew & Co. are miles away. Am I overthinking the matter? ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 01:11, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you. It's a slippery slope as soon as we start saying "we" are right and "they" are wrong. For our purposes here, it's best to avoid such, as you say, bear traps. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 01:48, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Kelli Martin

A tag has been placed on Kelli Martin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 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 confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Accounting4Taste:talk 17:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Just to explain a little further -- contestants on reality TV programmes are not considered notable until they've won the contest, unless there are other reasons for them to be considered notable. Unless/until they win, it's usually considered appropriate for there to be a reference to their names within the article about the programme, and that's it. If you have any questions about Wikipedia policy, you can leave me a note. Accounting4Taste:talk 17:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Every contestant on that show is by definition a non-notable designer, hoping to become notable. I don't see what the big deal is. We've got a major problem with these reality show contestant articles already. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:27, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

"contestants on reality TV programmes are not considered notable until..." That's reason to delete. It might even be reason to speedily delete. Is it reason though to over-ride a request to {{hangon}}? "Note that this request is not binding, and the page may still be deleted if the page unquestionably meets the speedy deletion criteria, or if the given explanation is unacceptable." Andy Dingley (talk) 18:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Wiki-rob clores.jpg

Nice pic, thanks for contributing it. Unfortunately there is no rename or move tool for images. All I can do is delete the misnamed one while you re-upload it with a new name. To prevent interruption, why don't you let me know when you've uploaded it again and then I'll get rid of the old copy. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 18:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Done. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 19:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Mises and being a reliable source

You get how an organization like mises.org is not a reliable source, right? Flowanda | Talk 03:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Mises is not a WP:RS. Flowanda | Talk 03:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I was totally rude, and I apologize. The original intent of my personal comments was to tease you a bit *because* of your name, but, duh, snide (not to mention stupid) is never funny and always inappropriate on Wikipedia. Flowanda | Talk 02:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

2008 Olympics attack on American nationals (2nd nomination)

I have re-nominated this article for deletion. Please provide your input to the discussion. --Elliskev 17:18, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Image

No problem. Thanks for the star. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 16:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Userboxes

After our talk of wikipedia, I was stricken with the urge to get more userboxes. Lots of them. Why type something about myself when people can make hasty generalizations about me based on quick visual associations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simplemindedted (talk • contribs) 09:01, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Input requested regarding Austrian School

You might be interested in this discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.15.181.154 (talk) 12:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Ron Paul

Ron Paul has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured quality. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Andrew Kelly (talk) 05:18, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey y'all!

We're going to be having our first Mississippi meetup next month, and I would love it if you'd like to come out! A few of us will be staying overnight, so if you feel up to it, we could have a meet and greet that night and then breakfast the next morning and talk about Wikipedia and everyone's areas of expertise. Let's show 'em how it's done Southern-style! Mike H. Fierce! 22:03, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Heather higgins.gif)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Robert Sirico

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Robert Sirico, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Potential discriminitory vandalism

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Robert Sirico, you will be blocked from editing.

Final warning

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Robert Sirico. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing.

Thanks

For the welcome and the editing tips. Take care! Silentbob05 (talk) 15:14, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Heather_higgins.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Heather_higgins.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell ^(talk) 02:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

This image is not used under a fair use rationale. It has been licensed by HBO. The permissions email was sent earlier today. DickClarkMises (talk) 03:10, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I will check back in a week for the OTRS tag. — neuro^(talk) 03:13, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

We get a lot of people passing screenshots off under free licenses, and it is a lot less BITEy to simply change the license than to send it to PUI or whatever. — neuro^(talk) 04:06, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Image permission problem with Image:Betsy McCaughey.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Betsy McCaughey.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media 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 GFDL 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-en@wikimedia.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 did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.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 image'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 uploaded by following this link. Images 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. — neuro^(talk) 20:21, 16 March 2009 (UTC)