There's been a long-established consensus that media lists should actually be spun out of the city article and into their own separate lists, whenever there's sufficient content to do so — please see Category:Lists of media by city and Category:Lists of media by city in Canada. For instance, there'd be no point in spinning out a "Media in Kenora" list from Kenora — but for a city the size of Guelph, it is often better because the media section and the city's main article are both quite substantial in length.
And even if there were a reason why we wanted the media list to be a section in the city's article instead of its own list, why would we deleteMedia in Guelph instead of redirecting it to the city's article? Bearcat (talk) 14:08, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Eileen Olexiuk.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 02:35, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Colvin testimony.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 02:35, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Re:Removal of images from Canadian Afghan detainee issue[edit]
Well, sorry, they don't. What those two people look like is of no importance to the issue, and so it fails NFCC#8, and, in any case, they're both still alive (I believe?) and so the use of the images is contrary to NFCC#1. J Milburn (talk) 02:54, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On 11 April 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Ununseptium, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
Thank you so much for the barnstar - it is much appreciated. Ruhrfisch><>°° 04:21, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at it again and did not see any major issues that I can see as far as GAN is concerned. The GA reviewer will doubtless find something I missed ;-) but this looks pretty good to me. I think I would make a little clearer what the non-gallery images are - so say they are Candaian or British troops pictured, or that it is a general image of a redacted document. Ruhrfisch><>°° 03:49, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi I will be doing the GA review for the Canadian Afghan detainee issue the link to the review page is here Talk:Canadian Afghan detainee issue/GA1.
I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.--Jim Sweeney (talk) 18:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good work seems ref 30 is the only sticking point and I think you could remove the statement without damaging the article. Jim Sweeney (talk) 15:27, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On 1 October 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article David Lloyd Johnston, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
NRX, thanks for your addition to Governor General of Canada. However, in future, please use the appropriate citation template (found here) instead of bare urls for inline citaitons. Cheers, --ĦMIESIANIACAL 16:34, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I removed that category to remove overcategorization. An article should be in a more specific subcat if possible, and removed from up the tree as it is then redundant. Ng.j (talk) 06:10, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I saw you removed the 'see also' section from CFAP article, and I wondered why you did so? The Canadian Forces page is definitely an interesting article to check for anyone who reads about the agency's Artists Program! Cheers - [CharlieEchoTango] 09:42, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I was reading your post here, and I got to tell you, I go to the page and I'm totally confused. What were you talking about? HuskyHuskie (talk) 22:13, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It would seem that moving an article that is being rapidly edited without extensive discussion is a major no-no. Hope I never make that mistake (I've made plenty of others already). Thanks for clarifying. HuskyHuskie (talk) 22:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it must be substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by visiting the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 23:11, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of a navbox template is to navigate back and forth between related article. Every item should be directly related and it should be placed in every link so that you can return again.
{{Metrolinx}} is only a shell for three other templates:
{{Navbox GO Transit}} does that adequately but there is no need for it to be inserted in unrelated articles.
{{Navbox Air Rail Link}} is mostly a series of redundant external links which are already in the ARL article. Related articles listed should be under "See also", since you are not going to insert the template there to allow you to navigate back.
{{Navbox Presto}} is mostly a series of redundant external links which are already in the article. You are not going to add this template to "Radio-frequency identification", "Accenture", "Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area", "Ottawa", etc. because they are not directly related to the PRESTO card, and you should not enter it in every transit system either.
What needs to be done is that the Metrolinx navbox is trimmed to only contain directly related articles. This would be the ones that currently link to it. The two redundant templates should be deleted. Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:58, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I'll work on it some more. Thanks. --NaturalRX 18:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks - good format now. You are correct, those main ones are divisions. Presto and Air Rail Link templates are not needed and should be deleted. The Presto one is simply a list of links already detailed and maintained in the Presto card#Rollout table. Air Rail Link template is unused. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:44, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How about http://www.hamiltonrapidtransit.ca/ Hamilton Rapid Transit? Should we create a new article, or is it just worth a section in HSR? Hamilton might really have a "street railway" again. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:07, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, I was just working on some stuff today, including an infobox and a track diagram. It appears the B-Line is a go for sure, its currently in a detailed design phase, and there may be enough content to warrant its own article (B-Line (Hamilton)?). As for everything else, it could go into another article about Hamilton RT, covering the "BLAST" plan. Thoughts? --NaturalRX 23:05, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 4[edit]
Hi. When you recently edited The Big Move, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Queen Street (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) 14:44, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
File:Pearson and union.jpgToronto's Union Station and Pearson Airport are considered major mobility hubs, where multiple transportation modes come together, including airplanes, buses, streetcars, subways, regional trains, pedestrians, and bicycles.
Toronto's Union Station and Pearson Airport are considered major mobility hubs, where multiple transportation modes come together, including airplanes, buses, streetcars, subways, regional trains, pedestrians, and bicycles
You don't need to make another file out of the two images you want to display together. By using the template {{multiple image}} you can combine several images both horizontally, as demonstrated, or vertically. The images can then be replaced individually to suit changes in the related article. Notice how I have simply reversed the images to match the text you used in The Big Move article. Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:04, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for this! --NaturalRX 19:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for November 23[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Air Rail Link, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CBC (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) 10:57, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have moved all the "Toronto Air Rail Link" templates to a Metrolinx system. It is only one line and by creating a system now it allows for the addition of other lines in the future. Color can also be standardized and does not need to be redefined every time. 23:41, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
I have also created a redirect for Toronto Pearson Terminal 1 Station (name on the website) so that no matter where the information moves to, until a station article is created, only the redirect needs to be adjusted. Secondarywaltz (talk) 00:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 1[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited BufferBox, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amazon (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) 11:30, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Natural RX. You have new messages at Secondarywaltz's talk page. Message added 22:50, 11 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited GO Transit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hamilton (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) 12:02, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"The Paradigm Shift at GO Transit" http://www.ceo.on.ca/files/GO,Final%20Presentation%20Slide%20Deck.pdf . Perhaps you can make something out of this. I find it a little confusing, since they seem to mix the use of colours throughout. I already sampled two for use in the station infobox. Your estimate to use for the default was pretty close so I left it, but I am not so sure that it is the primary. A public announcement should be coming - but so is Christmas :) Secondarywaltz (talk) 02:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I saw that too, but it seems that when they were prepping that slide deck, they had the primary and secondary colours reversed. From this Star article: "The new logo will see the word ‘GO’ change from a medium green to a darker, forest green tone....On the trains and buses, the current green — a meadow hue that perfectly matches that of Ontario’s highway signs — will be replaced by both the new logo green and a lighter apple green." So the darker green must have been changed between then and now as the new primary. Anyway, I changed the logo using that slide deck and applying my guess for the primary. Like you said, it's pretty close, we will have to wait for public announcement to get it exact. --NaturalRX 03:06, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should wait. The problem I have with this is that the Wikipedia branding does not match the current official GO Transit one. Remember that things need to be referenced. Secondarywaltz (talk) 03:24, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The proportions of File:GO Transit logo.svg are correct. There is no need to widen the spaces. If you need a small icon then create one. You are guessing at the new colours. This is still officially used. Just wait. Secondarywaltz (talk) 12:05, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll agree to waiting, but if you take a closer look, the new logo has bolder spacing on the T. I based it upon the slide deck you sent me. Here is a side-by-side comparison. --NaturalRX 13:43, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. That is a good side by side comparison. We won't know the exact proportions until GO publishes something better or upgrades their website. Secondarywaltz (talk) 14:06, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
See this publication. GO is now using the new logo on printed publications such as this schedule and other brochures on the train, but still not the website. Should we keep waiting? --NaturalRX 15:42, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I say GO! - but don't replace the old one, as if it never existed. There is historic value in the original design. I'm going to try and "catch" some of the new vehicles, with my camera, to capture their paint design. Secondarywaltz (talk) 15:48, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. The spacing and colour need slight adjustments, so I will do it tonight. --NaturalRX 16:02, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think you've already done it within the history of the old logo that I reverted. Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:05, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I checked it, my spacing is too wide and the colour is too greyish. I'll make sure it's done right. --NaturalRX 19:22, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But don't replace the old one, as if it never existed. There is historic value in the original design is what I requested above. Why don't you just create a new name for the new logo in Commons? Secondarywaltz (talk) 15:06, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
On second thoughts it might be easier to update the old one, so that it shows up everywhere, but create a historic copy of the original under a different name. Secondarywaltz (talk) 15:12, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That was my rationale for replacing it, but yes, I can re-upload the old one under a different name. I'm on a trip right now, so I'll have more time to do all of this next week. --NaturalRX 16:17, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
GO Bus in new colours. Perhaps you can find the appropriate place to insert it. Different reflected light and shade changes the apparent colours, so don't use this picture for sampling, stick to updates from the website. Note the addition of a Metrolinx logo towards the back. Secondarywaltz (talk) 02:22, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Navbox Presto has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Martin Morin (talk) 03:40, 11 August 2013 (UTC)