User talk:Proberts2003
Hello Proberts2003, welcome to Wikipedia.
You might find these links helpful: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.
If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!
- You can introduce yourself on the new users page.
- You can find lots more information, including open tasks and daily tips, at the community portal.
- You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp as well.
- Before saving a page, it's a good idea to use the Show preview button to review your edits. Also, consider writing a summary for each edit.
Again, welcome! Chris Roy 02:59, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Hi Paul - thanks for bringing my attention to the possibilities of this site - Gareth
Hello, Cheeky!
Hi Paul. Re me changing "the format 1st Janurary 1900 to 1 January 1900" on Hello, Cheeky, see style. In think 1 January looks much cleaner that 1st January. Incidentally, I have always used/preferred January 1 to 1 January, but wiki style has it either way, and it doesn't get up my nose these days :) Moriori 03:36, Apr 5, 2004 (UTC)
Hello. Can we discuss the sphericon business on Talk:Möbius strip, rather than you just putting it back on the page?
Charles Matthews 19:02, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)
InSAR article
[edit]Helloooooo there. Have a link to my InSAR page, so you can nitpick my grammar to your little heart's content. Eve 21:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
CESM
[edit]We're talking about the sentence "It is seen by some to be very ironic due to the crucial role the French played in the American War of Independence." The question I asked myself is "by whom is it seen in this way as ironical". The page over the years has seen many conjectures on the reason/meaning of the French part of the saying. So mainly, I pulled it because it is an assertion for which I must doubt that there is any objective basis. Further, it was added to the lad paragraph. That means it should be one of the most important things about the phrase. Even were the assertion to be provable - such as by citing the MORI poll in which people 'fessed up to thinking about the war of independence when presented with the phrase - the sentence would have been better added to some subsidiary paragraph. Happy to discuss further, if you want. --Tagishsimon (talk)
File source problem with File:Oak_Sphericon_2.jpg
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Oak_Sphericon_2.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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Oak_Sphericon.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Oak_Sphericon.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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Oak_Sphericon_1.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Oak_Sphericon_1.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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
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 tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:56, 16 December 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 13:56, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
File source problem with File:Oak Sphericon 1.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Oak Sphericon 1.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 uploaded by following this link. 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 15:27, 18 March 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. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 15:27, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:Oak Sphericon 1.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading File:Oak Sphericon 1.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-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 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-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 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 uploaded by following this link. 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. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 15:27, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:@UKLogo.gif
[edit]A file that you uploaded or altered, File:@UKLogo.gif, 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 are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 07:14, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
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) 22:12, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article CloudBuy 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/CloudBuy 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. Uhooep (talk) 19:17, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]
Hello, Proberts2003. 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)