User talk:Kwertii

Oil for food allegations

TDC, the user who has a comment about "sucking one's own dick" on his user page, created an article about the alleged Oil for Food Scandal. I put it on vote for deletion: [1] Get-back-world-respect 00:21, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your recent copy-edit of Albert Hofmann. Has been most welcome. Modified your in-text link a little... --Palapala 08:27, 2004 Apr 18 (UTC)

Glad to help :) Kwertii 14:26, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

peacock & weasel terms guidelines

What makes you think that either of these are disputed? Neither have any indication on the article or talk page. older≠wiser 22:21, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

OK, I completely overlooked those notices--stuff like that is usually at the top. older≠wiser 21:45, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)

Hallucinogenic drug

Hi Kwertii: The second sentence doesn't make sense to me, maybe you forgot some words? :-) Cacycle 12:59, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Join RWNB!

Hello, Kwertii! Though you might be interested in the Russian wikipedians' notice board. Come check it out! KNewman 04:36, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

Image source

Thanks for uploading Image:Kalinin.jpg. I notice that you claim that it's public domain. If so, it needs to be properly tagged as such. Why would this be PD? Age (pre 1928, I think), or Soviet pre-1973? Please review and add the appropriate tag to replace the "unsure" tag I put on it as part of the Untagged Images project. (Likewise any others that you're resonsible for.) Thanks! Kbh3rd 04:07, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Likewise, Image:Kamenev.jpg. Kbh3rd 04:28, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Also, look at Image:NataliaSedova.jpg. ChickenFalls 18:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright

Thank you for uploading Image:Berlin.bezirke.png and for stating the source. However, its copyright status is unclear, so it may have to be deleted. If it is open content or public domain, please give proof of this on the image page. If the image is fair use, please provide a rationale. Thank you. --Ellmist

Chechen coat of arms

hi kwertii. i've uploaded this coat onto the commons (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Chechen_coat_of_arms.jpg) . could you please add the source? Schaengel89 @me 11:10, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image source

Thank you for uploading Image:Sonny Black.jpg. Its copyright status is unclear, so it may have to be deleted. Please leave a note on the image page about the source of the image. Thank you.

Blood Sausage

Thanks for adding the reference to blood sausage to taboo meat. It hadn't even occurred to me, which says something about me as I added the info on people drinking blood! Garglebutt 22:34, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Microsoft

Hi - generally we are trying to keep the controversial stuff into common criticisms of Microsoft so that we can try to keep the main MS article clean. There's already a section for that too --Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 17:31, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft again

Hi, I made quite a few edits... what do you think? Is there enough in there now do you think, should something else be added? --Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 22:15, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft Subheadings

Hi, the reason I changed some of them is because some people will vote against you on FAC if you have too many - so we'd just be changing them back then anyway... --Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 01:40, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your edits BTW. It reads better now ::) --Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 01:57, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Skull (symbolism)

Should you detect statements that offend your sense of a neutral, intelligent, mainstream response to any subject, please copy them into the talk page and present your personal opinions. Do not begin with an "NPOV" tag at any article where you have not made a single previous edit. Perhaps you will make some contributions to the encyclopedia report at Skull (symbolism) from your own reading and observations, or provide some quotes that show how a skull is used as a symbol in your cultural background. The "NPOV" tag is a last resort. --Wetman 22:25, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mengele.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Mengele.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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 its not being deleted. Thank you. —MetsBot 18:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC) Thuresson 00:27, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:KarlRadek.jpg has been listed as a possibly unfree image

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:KarlRadek.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

In general, many of the images you have uploaded include no source information. Regardless of whether you think an image is in the public domain, you should include precise information (e.g. a URL) about where you got the image and why you think it is public domain or whatever. Images without source information will be deleted. —Steven G. Johnson 04:15, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good!

I just want to say that I think you made a really good point with your edit to the Lenin article, about the tsars... Good observation. Appreciate it! Bronks 23:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Bonanno.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Bonanno.gif. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 21:15, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Kirov.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Kirov.gif. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 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 uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Thuresson 12:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:BolshevikCentralCommittee.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BolshevikCentralCommittee.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:17, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Edit

You really need to learn what Minor edit means!--Pethr 03:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Governess

I don't know what sources prior editors used for Governess, but I have addeed some external links and "further reading", as well as an image. I'll leave it to you to decide if this is sufficient to remove the "unreferenced" tag you added. - PKM 20:00, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Beria-small.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Beria-small.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 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 03:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 03:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Abahlali baseMjondolo

Could you give an idea which facts you wish to be cited in this article (you need to cite quotes and things that might be challenged, I don't see any quotes and the article seems to be a listing of historical and institutional "facts" that you can read about at their site)? I'm not saying that the article is very good right now, but I'm trying to work with its main creator(s) in order that they might learn about wp and continue editing in the future. I know the external links section is pretty bad right now, but it has the makings of a collection of references, which it obviously is. Smmurphy^(Talk) 07:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:CarlPanzram-mugshot.jpeg

Thanks for uploading Image:CarlPanzram-mugshot.jpeg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Meyer Lansky.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Meyer Lansky.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, then 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, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 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 11:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 11:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same for Image:MeyerLanskySmaller.jpeg. --Sherool (talk) 11:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do not remove "no source" tags unless you actualy provide the source. Just saying it's a mugshot is not a source, we need to know where it came from and who hold the copyright to it (preferably also when it was taken). The image also need a fair use rationale by the way. --Sherool (talk) 22:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Task force

I checked your edits to the Salem Witch Trials and I saw the good picture and good edits you added and from seeing that, I infer you might want to join a new taskforce I just started, the Salem Witch Trials task force.

Thank you.

Psdubow 22:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plate

It would be very nice if you could delete the licenceplate of the motorcycle for sake of the drivers privacy thanxs tom@zyankali.de

Unspecified source for Image:Trafficante.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Trafficante.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, then 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, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 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 18:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Thuresson 18:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:CarlPanzram-mugshot.jpeg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:CarlPanzram-mugshot.jpeg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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. ShakespeareFan00 15:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:CarlPanzram-mugshot.jpeg

Thanks for uploading Image:CarlPanzram-mugshot.jpeg. 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, then 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, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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. 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 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 15:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 15:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Masseria.gif

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Masseria.gif, 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. Calliopejen1 01:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Convulsive therapy

Hi,

I notice you've edited the convulsive therapy article in the past. Currently it has numerous fact tags dating back to June/July of this year, and without the unverified facts there isn't much of an article left. If you know of any appropriate sources, I wonder if you could add them? If not, I'm going to propose the article for deletion. Thanks. Nmg20 17:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Convulsive therapy

An article that you have been involved in editing, Convulsive therapy, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Convulsive therapy. Thank you. Nmg20 (talk) 12:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't make me laugh

"Many web designers find fault with Internet Explorer's disregard for the open standards upon which the Web is based, specifically those of the World Wide Web Consortium, of which Microsoft is a member. " Completely unsourced.

"Internet Explorer does not pass the Acid2 test, a test case designed by the Web Standards Project to verify CSS compliance." Unsourced and rather irrelevant (Acid2 is a completely useless exercise, you surely know this).

"During Microsoft's antitrust trial, prosecutors used this practice (among others) as evidence of Microsoft's monopolistic "embrace, extend and extinguish" business practices. " A total non sequiter and unsourced.

"Internet Explorer supports a number of standardized technologies, but has numerous implementation gaps and conformance failures (e.g. the DOM getElementById() function in Internet Explorer checks both name and ID attributes, which is non-conformant behavior) (e.g. the incorrect handling of vertical margin for HTML horizontal rule tags) that have led to criticism from an increasing number of developers. The increase is at least partially attributable to growth in use of competing browsers that offer a relatively thorough, standards-compliant browsing experience. " The entire paragraph is completely unsourced.

"Web developers must often work with the technology supported across all browsers for cross-platform development. Because of this, Internet Explorer lends itself to criticism for its technical inferiorities when compared with its competition.{{Fact}}" not just unsourced, but not worthy of an encyclopedia. We don't make harsh statements like this without sources.

"The browser's ubiquity, despite its shortcomings, may frustrate developers who wish to write standards-compliant, cross-browser code and utilize the advanced functionality it provides , because they may find themselves writing markup and scripts around Internet Explorer's incorrect and/or missing functionality. It is also claimed that lack of support in Internet Explorer is responsible for holding back the widespread adoption by webmasters of several new open technology standards." Completely unsourced.

Do not replace them without sourcing them, please. Some unsourced statements in an article may be acceptable, but this was ridiculous. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 04:06, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, I dunno. He might not have, that was kind of pushing it, and I'd like to apologize since I apparently offended you. Still, I simply wanted to tell you that I'd rather you not make me laugh with regards to basic tenants such as WP:V. Some things are funny, edit wars over basic tenants of the 'pedia are not. (Jesus certainly spoke far more harshly at times, though the offenses of those he spoke out against were far greater than yours.) I still don't know, but apologize since you were offended.

And, oh yeah... the truth of what I wrote still holds. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 07:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:Masseria.gif

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Masseria.gif. 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.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. 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. 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 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 01:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Superm401 - Talk 01:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You need to stop uploading images with copyright problems, and review your existing images for issues. If you keep ignoring copyright issues, you will be blocked. Superm401 - Talk 02:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I told you is not a order I'm "issuing". It's Wikipedia policy not to allow copyright infringements, and to ban editors that repeatedly post infringing images. Superm401 - Talk 05:40, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:BolshevikCentralCommittee.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:BolshevikCentralCommittee.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 13:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 13:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for File:BolshevikCentralCommittee.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:BolshevikCentralCommittee.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:33, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mafia page moves from 2004

I was checking out the old history of the Mafia article and found that the first edit listedc there is quite strange because it indicates that there were previous edits, but there aren't any in the history. I also noticed that you moved the Italian Mafia page to "Mafia" in September 2004. I know it was a long time ago, but do you remember anything odd happening with that page move? Or do you know of another reason for the missing page history? I understand that the move function was a bit temperamental in those days, so the server may have eaten the earlier edits. I checked the old deletion log for March and early April 2004 (requires admin access), but couldn't find anything relevant. I will add the info I can find to my list of page history observations. Graham87 07:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Trafficante2.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Trafficante2.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 19:36, 10 January 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:36, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:SantoTrafficanteJr.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:SantoTrafficanteJr.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 19:36, 10 January 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:36, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dienstflagge Berlin.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dienstflagge Berlin.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files 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. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:39, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flagge Berlin.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Flagge Berlin.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files 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. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:54, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Kollontai.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Kollontai.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 15:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Armed Bear Common Lisp

I have nominated Armed Bear Common Lisp, 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/Armed Bear Common Lisp. 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. TexasAndroid (talk) 23:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:NikolaiBukharin.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:NikolaiBukharin.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 13:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Hale

Speedy deletion nomination of Mark Hale

A tag has been placed on Mark Hale requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, 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. Pstanton (talk) 23:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Candide

In response - there is a series of critics following that statement. There is some leeway with making such statements when they are used as introductions to a list of critics. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:34, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Computer role-playing game

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Computer role-playing game. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Computer role-playing game. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Kwertii! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 5 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Mark Hale - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:48, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Etsy news release

Hi! I noticed you added the "newsrelease" tag to the Etsy article, and I'm wondering if you have any suggestions about how to improve that article to be more balanced. First, which part of the talk page are you refererring to with "direct whitewashing"? I'm not sure what you mean. Also, one reason the article is pretty positive is because the cited reliable sources are generally very positive about Etsy. There a lot of newer articles about the site since I did a big edit, but I think most of them are fairly positive too. The "Community" section should probably be cited, but it's not egregiously inaccurate or puffed-up. Balancing the tone of that article is sort of a challenge I haven't been able to figure out. Dreamyshade (talk) 18:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Kornilov.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Kornilov.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 created in your upload log. 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 06:46, 8 May 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. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 06:46, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ayahausca

{{citations}} - most of the assertions in thie article are unsourced

That's strange, as I see 39 inline citations and more than 30 references listed. Drive-by tagging is really not helpful. Viriditas (talk) 08:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

39 citations is not nearly enough for an article of that length. The majority of the article contains blank assertions with no citations. Do you really think it's necessary to go through and insert {{fact}} tags on almost every single sentence for 70% of the text? Kwertii (talk) 09:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The majority? That sounds like an exaggeration. I don't see a majority of the article containing blank assertions with no citations. Could you make a list of the most egregious claims and place them on the talk page? I don't see the purpose of the {{citations}} tag if you aren't going to do the work. Viriditas (talk) 09:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was rather obvious which sections needed citations - those that don't have any! At your request, I've added a list of those sections to the Talk page. Additionally, you are out of line acting as a self-appointed tag legitimacy police, arrogantly offering opinions on in what situations others should and should not use tags, and whether they are obligated to do certain other things as a result. Kwertii (talk) 11:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy this place. Feel free to keep experimenting as you go, no matter how long it takes you. When you have a free moment, please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:Tagging pages for problems. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Viriditas (talk) 11:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to be an ass. Kwertii (talk) 11:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would you prefer a penguin? Cheer up, mi amigo. Thanks for using the talk page and explaining the problem. Viriditas (talk) 11:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mark Hale

The article Mark Hale has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:ACADEMIC, lacks independent support for the statement of notability.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PK T(alk) 18:34, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

This permission does not give you any special status or authority
Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 11:29, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Goleta, California, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages InTouch and ATK (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) 12:10, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 11

Hi. When you recently edited Andronico's, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Danville, Walnut Creek and Berkeley (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) 11:00, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of SK Foods

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. —The Illusive Man— ^(Contact) 21:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Illusive Man (talk • contribs) [reply]

Nomination of SK Foods for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article SK Foods 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/SK Foods until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 18:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions for Speculation article

Hi there Kwertii, I've recently begun working on some improvements to the Speculation article, with and on behalf of the Managed Funds Association, and I noticed that you have made some constructive edits to this page earlier this month. Since you have some familiarity with the topic I wondered if you'd be able to review the changes I've prepared? The changes focus on the Regulation section to include details of recent regulation and remove details of plans that never actually materialized. My edit request on the article's Talk page includes the full details of the suggested changes. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 22:24, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Barbagelata, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Republican Party (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) 14:10, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited John Avalos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ed Lee (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) 14:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Christina Olague, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Central Valley (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) 11:22, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Odin

Hello, I wondered whether you could comment here, since the section seems to be written entirely by you? Cheers. --Saddhiyama (talk) 11:12, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Begging, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Work (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) 11:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:NikolaiBukharin.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

File:NikolaiBukharin.jpg

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 00:48, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Steel strike of 1986 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Strike and Lockout

U.S. Steel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Strike and Lockout

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Kwertii. You have new messages at Iryna Harpy's talk page.
Message added 01:11, 28 May 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:11, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greenspun's tenth rule

Sorry, you meant well, but your expanded version of the meaning section gave some objections. Feel free to discuss the topic on its talk page. -- Zz (talk) 12:13, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Kwertii. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Kwertii. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Haircut (finance)

Greetings. There is an ongoing discussion in the Talk page of the article "Haircut (finance)." As a past contributor to that article, I invite you to participate since it's a rather important issue for the subject. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 11:21, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:13, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for History of Pittsburgh

History of Pittsburgh has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 23:49, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]