Anubis3

Welcome to my user talk page! Anubis3 06:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Some assistance

Hey could you please take a look at the "diplom" article. The issue is with the Abitur having nothing to do with the article. Apparently, some anonymous IP is playing games, does not understand the rules of Wikipedia and is making personal attacks. I asked them to take a look at What Wikipedia is Not but the user doesn't seem to understand. The user also doesn't seem to be a qualified English contributor. I am going to revert the irrelevant changes. Thanks! InfoAgent 16:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Umm...sure I'll take a look but I really don't want to get involved in edit wars. I hope you can understand. Why don't you try an RfC and then mediation? aNubiSIII ^{(T / C)} 09:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Here (Quentin X 12:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC))

I'd put something funny but I think we're past that (Quentin X 12:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC))

Keep The Peace

Just testing my friend. I may have been drunk..!! (Quentin X 23:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC))

Many thanks for the Barnstar (my first). Many apologies for the untoward edit yesterday, I was very drunk and I think it took me about 5 minutes to type. I appreciate that people can disagree on certain things and that it can get slightly personal but we are all aiming for the same thing and we can lose sight of that sometimes. I look forward to working together in the future. (Quentin X 12:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC))

Replaceable fair use Image:Bio_hamadam.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Bio_hamadam.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image 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 the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 11:27, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Seton Hall University Good Article Status

Hi, I'm reaching out to all the major editors of the SHU article in hopes of finishing up some edits required to bring the article up to GA status. The article had passed GA, but was then placed on hold, contingent on our finishing the items on our to do list. I'd appreciate any help you could give in making this happen. Regards, Mystache 16:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Congressional Medal of Honor

Hi Jons63! I noticed some of your recent edits concerning the denotation of the Congressional Medal of Honor. Its important to note, however, that removing "Congressional" from the name may possibly misrepresent the naming of this medal. For example, in the disambiguation page you may notice that there is more than one Medal of Honor (i.e. not just for the United States). I'd equate it to something like the difference between The Civil War and the American Civil War. While U.S. military personnel may simply use Medal of Honor in their jargon, this is not entirely suitable for use in an international encyclopedia. Besides this, however, I would like to thank you for your other edits and keep up the good work ethic! Best, aNubiSIII ^{(T / C)} 16:53, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

This topic has been discussed at Medal of Honor. The consensus was that the medal should be called Medal of Honor not Congressional Medal of Honor. Medal of Honor is not jargon, it is the official name of the medal as written into the law passed by the US Congress that created the medal. On most of the pages I edited, the medal was also called Medal of Honor in the infobox on the right side of the article, so I was making the articles consistent within themselves as well as across Wikipedia. Thanks for the advice Jons63 23:10, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi there again Jons63! I'm not exactly sure if I got my point across before accurately. I'm not insinuating that Medal of Honor is an incorrect term. I am merely saying that there is NO need to remove Congressional from the phrase on different wikipedia articles. Using Congressional is more specific terminology and does not subtract at all from the meaning. You must recognize that there are other medals of honor such as in China, Turkey, etc.

Furthermore, I don't see any discussion much less any consensus about this issue on the Medal of Honor Talk Page. Also, please try not to repost any other user's comments with their signatures unless you make it explicity clear that your are quoting them. These issues should not become points of contention, I hope you understand. Look forward to your future edits! Best, aNubiSIII ^{(T / C)} 00:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Congressional Medal of Honor is not more specific if it is not the name of any Medal issued by the US or any other country. I went back and looked again, Talk:Medal of Honor/Archive 1, and there is a huge discussion and the way I read the discussion, it is a consensus that the name should be Medal of Honor not Congressional Medal of Honor. I believe it IS necessary to remove Congressional from the name since it is not the correct name according to 32CFR578.9 [1]

I do recognise there are other Medals of Honor other than the one given out by the US. I don't think this should be a bone of contention either. If you believe that the name that is used on Wikipedia for this medal should be changed to something else go to the page and advocate for it. I believe it is the proper name with the other possibility being Medal of Honor (United States) but never Congressional Medal of Honor We shouldn't call something an incorrect name just because people call it the incorrect name. Wikipedia should be about correct information not continuing to perpetuate incorrect information.

I apologize for copying your post to my talk page to your talk page. Jons63 01:28, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Image of Nobel medal

I'm not convinced that it's not a copyright violation to post the image of the Nobel medal for the same reason why people's personal pictures of stamps have been removed from WP. I can ask around to make sure. At any rate, could you edit your picture and remove some of the unnecessary black space that's around it? –panda 22:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Just wanted to point out that you haven't stated what the RFC is about in Talk:Nobel Prize. I assume it is about your image. –panda 05:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out. It has been added. aNubiSIII ^{(T / C)} 15:31, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

You're sane, I'm sane, let's just leave the image off until the discussion at WP:PUI is resolved. Otherwise, it's not going to be worth the aggravation. Sound ok? -- But|seriously|folks  05:24, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that is probably for the best. Really hope it gets resolved though. aNubiSIII ^{(T / C)} 05:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)~

Sorry for necromancing, but I have asked for an informal devbate on the image. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 23:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:DSCN0732.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:DSCN0732.JPG. 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. BetacommandBot 18:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Seton Hall alumni

Hey Anibus - I saw you reverted my change to List of notable Seton Hall University alumni, which was an attempt to fix the screwed-up moving undo done by User:Wfrancisd. The problem is, becasue User:Wfrancisd did not know what he/she was doing, the moving undo left the different, almost identical article List of Seton Hall University alumni - the latter is the page linked from the main Seton Hall article, and the one that has the name that follows the WP convention (check the category - no other U.S. university list has "notable" in its title) - so now we have a fork, which is a no-no. I think my change was the right thing to do, but you seem to have a different idea for fixing this - I'd love to hear it, and/or help if I can. Let me know by responding here, I'll watch this page. UnitedStatesian 05:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

UnitedSebastian, please note that your repeated moving of List of notable Seton Hall University alumni to List of Seton Hall University alumni has lead to a loss of significant information from the article. Whether this is intentional or not, this MUST BE corrected. Otherwise, it will be perceived as vandalism.

As to the issue of notability, I should remind you that moslist refers only to guidelines. Notability has always been and will continue to be an important criterion of WP articles. This especially goes for lists, where people can be added of whom there are NO respective articles. In this case, there is no way to know the notability of the individual. I urge you to read Wikipedia:Notability people#Lists of people and WP:NOTABLE ALUMNI. Furthermore, I have seen no significant discussion on this issue and noticed that you made changes to the moslist guidelines yourself. Regardless of this, since you have succeeded in forking most of the alumni lists, I will not revert the changes on the Seton Hall University article. However, I remind you that your move MUST BE corrected to include all lost information as soon as possible to avoid any confusion. Thank you. aNubiSIII ^{(T / C)} 06:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Apologoies - the information loss was unintentional and I have rectified it: the two lists now match. Can I now remove the fork that exists under the "notable" title? There has been significant discussion, here, here and elsewhere, of the impropriety of using "notable" in the Names of list articles (both of the guidelines you point to deal with the content of the articles, not what they are named) I have not forked any other list, and I did not fork this one: User:Wfrancisd did. UnitedStatesian 14:02, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Re. image

I can confirm that the current image is the same image uploaded by David Monniaux in 2005, only downsized. In addition to the fact that I took David's original and downsized it myself, administrators can also view deleted images, and I've looked at the large original (the one I deleted when I uploaded the smaller version. It is the same photo. You can also ask any administrator to confirm this. Ral315 » 03:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:DSCN0732.JPG

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:DSCN0732.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 non-free media lacking such an explanation will 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. Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 19:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the template message but this photo needs a fair use rationale. This photograph is not a derivative work because there is no significant creative content. You can neither claim copyright on this image nor release it under the GFDL. Thanks --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 19:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry but admin or not, your recent edits to Image:DSCN0732.JPG and Nobel Prize completely ignore a lengthy discussion of the issue by other admins((admins) and users alike. I would like to point out that your fellow admins have already made statements of the nature: "It's becoming clear to me that NYS doesn't have a case for wanting this removed, under law or policy" and "The Nobel website indicates that the medals' design has not changed since 1902. So it's in the public domain. There's no need for permissions or to resort to fair use". I encourage you to take a closer look at the discussion before you decide to make unilateral edits. I would, however, like to fill you in on some important factors that have been established so far: 1) Fair use rationale is clearly not the issue here, nobel images are PD in the US since the medal was published before 1923 (hence, the image cannot be still under copyright by the Nobel Foundation). 2) The use of trademarks is allowed on Wikipedia. 3) As to the copyright of the photograph (i.e. the work being contributed) it belonged to me until I released it under GDFL. I am sure a review of the discussion will make these points clear. If you have a diverging opinion please elaborate on Talk:Nobel Prize first. Thank you. aNubiSIII ^{(T / C)} 08:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but what does being an admin have to do with this subject? Neither I nor any of the other admins involved with this should be invoking some special authority or special ability to determine copyright status. I only got involved because NYScholar listed one of these images on WP:CP and I declined to delete it as a copyright violation. I don't want them removed either, I just wanted them tagged correctly. I didn't "ignore" the lengthy discussion, I just placed the correct tags on the image. I don't agree with your assessments of the situation. Copyrights only expire if their holders let them expire; Nobel is still claiming copyright on these designs. I don't agree that your photograph is a derivative work. However, all that being said, I don't care enough about it to edit war with you over it. If we receive a copyright complaint from Nobel about the images, we're worry about it then. --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 03:43, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Edits 26.11.07

See my comment [2] at Image talk:DSCN0732.JPG. I haven't changed my view. It was just that if a certain person wants to keep reverting you, I wanted to try to get them to revert you to something at least a little bit more sane. Probably a vain hope, though. Jheald (talk) 09:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

MEETING

If possible theres a meeting going on in irc.freenode.net in channel #SHU about seton hall —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rankun (talk • contribs) 17:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

2 weeks

In addition to the current team i intend on getting half the campus involved, if i dont have it fixed by then give me notice on the articles that arent properly expanded and within 5 days they will be done.\ Its gonna be awsome, i promise, and please sign up with the wikiproject —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rankun (talk • contribs) 03:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

addition to that

The big bar thing, is almost a direct port of dartmouths, of course i edited the color, the names have been changed from dartmouth college to seton hall university and a few minor edits along with a complete redo of frats,sororities etc but the things you suggested were against wikipolicy were directly from dartmouth Rankun (talk) 03:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Onenewarkcenter.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Onenewarkcenter.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. Davepape (talk) 18:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The template for all the schools

We need to add more acedemics for fa status149.150.236.26 (talk) 08:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:User SHULaw

A tag has been placed on Template:User SHULaw requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

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 is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Menzies.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Menzies.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Slovenia

I would like to invite you to join WikiProject Slovenia ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 15:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:2007-11-11_141540.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:2007-11-11_141540.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Kelly ^hi! 04:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Loyola University New Orleans

Thanks for your detailed explanation on the talk page about the logo/seal debate. Its really a non-issue to me, as I remarked on the page. The bigger deal is the US News and World report ranking of Loyola. After a few confusing edits (see the history...), I made it clear that Loyola is ranked sixth in a certain subset of Southern universities that offer a mix of undergrad and masters programs, without offering much for PhD students. This category is called the University-Masters category. I added two citations: one explaining what the category means, another showing that Loyola was ranked #6 in that category. I think this should resolve the issue. Let me know if you feel otherwise. Eclectek ^{C T} 04:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Seton Hall University

I'd like to not edit war over this. Check out this conversation: Template_talk:Distinguish#Rationale_for_this_template. While I understand that no guideline exists for its use yet, that doesn't mean that one shouldn't exist for its use. I think our situation is a good example. I was looking for Seton Hall University and accidentally found Seton Hill University. Since someone who hears about Seton Hall, but hears Seton Hill (or the other mispronounces it himself) and knows less about Seton Hall might find himself reading about Seton Hill instead. Of three words, two are the same and the other sounds very similar, making 8 out of 9 syllables and 18 out of 19 letters identical between the two. I added tags to each, so that others with less knowledge of each wouldn't get confused between such easily misheard=confused topics. What are your thoughts now? --Aepoutre (talk) 18:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I understand your concern but if you look to the guidelines, you will see that such ambiguities are meant to be rectified vis-a-vis the disambig pages. That is why I cited WP:DISAMBIG in my edit. Unfortunately, despite that fact that they are similar indeed, they are still different names. In no case should this go on the Seton Hall article itself. In fact, I don't know if you noticed, but there was already a mention of this under the "Seton Hall" disambig page (its proper place). However, for the sake of clarity, I made expanded on it and made it clear that the two are not to be confused. aNubiSIII ^{(T / C)} 02:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm a Seton Hill professor who regularly finds my college mis-identified as "Seton Hall." My reading of the Wikipedia policy for disambiguation leads me to think that the Wikipedia policy doesn't apply here, since disambiguation is for two entities with the same name, not similar names. The first paragraph of the Seton Hill entry mentions that it's located near Pittsburgh, and the second paragraph mentions Seton Hall by name, and I think that taken together, that's already enough disambiguation. Dennis G. Jerz (talk) 23:31, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:DSCN0811a.JPG

File:DSCN0811a.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:West facade of Buckingham Palace.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: [[File:West facade of Buckingham Palace.JPG]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 16:08, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Immaculate conception seminary listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Immaculate conception seminary. Since you had some involvement with the Immaculate conception seminary redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Auntof6 (talk) 19:49, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Jeff Winger

I have nominated Jeff Winger, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Winger. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. --EEMIV (talk) 19:04, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Citation

Please provide an inline citation at the end of the sentence you restored, or remove this uncited WP:ORish claim. --EEMIV (talk) 20:04, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Soliciting input

If you're going to ask one of an article's prior editors to participate at AfD, you should include all of them -- including, in this case, User:Unitanode. Was there a reason you didn't? --EEMIV (talk) 01:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Really don't appreciate the way you handled this. My reponse [here]. aNubiSIII ^{(T / C)} 06:04, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Article Incubator Invitation for Bocconi School of Law Student-Edited Papers

Hi. I have put an article on Bocconi School of Law Student-Edited Papers in the article incubator, here: Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Bocconi School of Law Student-Edited Papers. Considering your previous experience editing articles on law journals, feel free to cooperate if you have any practical ideas to help establish notability. Incidentally, let me anticipate that the journal is actually the first student-edited legal working paper series, which has been created in Europe better to adapt to the editorial panorama of the Old Continent, where student-edited law reviews are not nearly as popular as they are in the US. I have already provided references (e.g. an article appeared on the German Law Journal) for these claims. Thanks for any help you may provide me with, --Grasshopper6 (talk) 10:19, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Ggiraldo SF.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Ggiraldo SF.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only," "non-derivative use" or "used with permission," it has not been shown to comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. [3], and it was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19, or is not used in any articles. If you agree with the deletion, there is no need to do anything. If, however, you believe that this image may be retained on Wikipedia under one of the permitted conditions then:

• state clearly the source of the image. If it has been copied from elsewhere on the web you should provide links to: the image itself, the page which uses it and the page which contains the license conditions.
• add the relevant copyright tag.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 22:45, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Given that Mr Giraldo is deceased, it may well be better to use this not-quite-free-enough image (with a non-free content rationale) than a completely non-free one like a promo pic. If you want to do that, please let me know and I will undelete the file. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:54, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Seton hall.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Seton hall.png. 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. Skier Dude (talk) 05:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Immaculate Conception Seminary School of Theology seal.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Immaculate Conception Seminary School of Theology seal.png. 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. Skier Dude (talk) 05:06, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

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) 13:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Regis seal.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Regis seal.PNG. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:38, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Detroit mercy seal.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Detroit mercy seal.PNG. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:22, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Seton Hall University College of Nursing coat of arms.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Seton Hall University College of Nursing coat of arms.png. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:47, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Jeff Winger (Community)

Hello, Anubis3. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Jeff Winger (Community), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Patrick E. Hobbs

The article Patrick E. Hobbs has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

article subject fails to meet relevant notability standard

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.

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:11, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Jeff Winger (Community)

Hello, Anubis3. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Jeff Winger".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:42, 1 April 2023 (UTC)