User talk:68DANNY2/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] January 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Ford Taurus has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Alexfusco5 19:43, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Miley Cyrus has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Snowolf How can I help? 16:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions, including your edits to Miley Cyrus. However, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article, or any other Wikipedia page, must include proper sources. Thank you. Gossip does not belong in an article NrDg 17:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Vanessa Anne Hudgens. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. NrDg 21:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Playhouse Disney : Live on Stage!

A tag has been placed on Playhouse Disney : Live on Stage!, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

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 (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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. RT | Talk 17:05, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ashley Tisdale picture

It's not a matter of liking the picture ... it's a matter of legality. We can't use a copyrighted album cover picture to discuss anything but the album. It's a copyright violation to use the cover as an illustration of an article on Ashley Tisdale. The picture that is used may not be good, but it has the proper licensing to be used.Kww (talk) 15:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll assume good faith and say that wasn't vandalism. · AndonicO Hail! 15:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome!


Welcome!

Hello, 68DANNY2, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, they are appreciated. I hope you like it here, and decide to stay. Here a few pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask at the help desk, leave me a message on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  · AndonicO Hail!

You're welcome. I know all those pages can be daunting, but make sure you read the "five pillars", at least (the rest you learn as you go along). Cheers. :) · AndonicO Hail! 15:45, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and the main tip for improving your userpage is to copy from others. You can also find a lot of things here, or here. Good luck, and if you need help, just ask. · AndonicO Hail! 15:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, the recent edit you made to Chrysler Voyager has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Antonio Lopez (talk) 16:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plymouth Voyager & Chrysler Voyager

Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Plymouth Voyager & Chrysler Voyager, without explaining the reason for the removal in the edit summary. Unexplained removal of content does not appear constructive, and your edit has been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox for test edits. Thank you. --Blanchardb-Me•MyEars•MyMouth-timed 16:54, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Plymouth Voyager & Chrysler Voyager

An article that you have been involved in editing, Plymouth Voyager & Chrysler Voyager, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plymouth Voyager & Chrysler Voyager. Thank you. Blanchardb-Me•MyEars•MyMouth-timed 17:01, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

You recently made an edit with the following summary:

There is no need for the article, as a newer article has been made with the same content.

What you are really saying is that there is absolutely no need for the newer article. See WP:MERGE and WP:MOVE. --Blanchardb-Me•MyEars•MyMouth-timed 17:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RFA.

I highly recommend not running for adminship right now: very few users pass who have been here less than five months, and most who do pass have several thousand contributions. If you stick around for a (long) while, you might get an offer to be nominated though. · AndonicO Hail! 17:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I've added you to the huggle whitelist, so hopefully you won't be getting reverted quite so often... · AndonicO Hail! 17:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


My friend, you have only 146 edits in total, made since 26th January this year. It looks as if you are attempting to post a request for adminship, though you have to date not done it correctly. Please be advised that the chance of the community accepting you for admin responsibility without at least three months experience and at least two thousand edits (more is better) is negligible. It is necesssary to show us that you have acquired the skillsw needed to function as an admin, which demonstrably you as yet have not. I hope that you will continue to edit, and with increasing experience adminship will become a possibility; right now it is not. Please feel free to ask me, or indeed any of the users you mention on your userpage, for any advice that you feel you need. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 20:32, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plymouth

Thanks for removing the spurious images above the model list. I meant to do that and guess I lost track of it during my edit work. —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Becoming an administrator

I'm not an administrator and have not, so far, attempted to become one. However, I have put in a great deal of time and effort on Wikipedia since late 2005, and there remains a significant backlog of followup and completion on the improvements and expansions I've initiated, so I'll likely be here awhile. And, I've had considerable experience interacting with all kinds of editors and various administrators. So, I'll share some thoughts.

First off, you're brand new here. Why do you want, per se, to be an administrator? What exactly is your goal in seeking adminship? (I ask these as serious questions, not rhetorical ones, and would like to read your answer). Usually, it works the other way round: You spend a couple years (yes, years) becoming intimately familiar with Wikipedia policy, protocol, and procedure. You build up a track record of valuable contributions — cited with reliable sources when they involve adding article content, compliant when they involve article structure and format — as well as of evenhandedness, lack of bias, and adherence to the core principles that guide Wikipedia. You learn and practise the principle that Wikipedia strives towards verifiability, not "truth". You learn and practise the fine balance between being bold and obtaining and adhering to consensus. You demonstrate a consistent ability to participate in the building of consensus, and to work coöperatively and interact with others in a civil manner even when the consensus doesn't go your way. You avoid edit wars and personal attacks. You lead by example, following even the "minor" Wiki protocols (such as signing your talk page comments. You show yourself willing to do work that needs doing, even when it lies beyond your specific area of keen interest. (NB this is by no means an exhaustive checklist of prerequisites). And then you make your case in a request for adminship, pointing to the track record you've built and comprehensively and satisfactorily addressing the concerns and queries other editors and admins have regarding your proposed adminship.

I'm afraid you haven't exactly got off on the right foot with your attempt to merge Plymouth Voyager and Chrysler Voyager. The list of problems here is pretty extensive: you didn't make even a cursory attempt to discuss the issue, let alone attain consensus — you just unilaterally decided to merge the articles. In fact, you evidently didn't read the talk pages of the articles at all; if you had, you'd've seen this idea has been discussed at length before, and no consensus to merge has been attained. You merged the articles in a sloppy, thrown-together fashion; it seems you did not take the time to read up on proper merge techniques (even if the merge itself had been proper, which again I emphasise it was not). And to top it all off, you gave the merged article a name indicating you not only haven't read the basics of article structure and nomenclature, but also haven't spent much time reading Wikipedia to develop an organic sense of what is and isn't kosher.

Your followup to my edits of Plymouth were appropriate and appreciated, but the best advice I can give you right now is to slow down. Hang back. Don't make the mistake of thinking you'll fast-track yourself to adminship by rapidly building up an edit history. Edit count is important, but edit quality is even more important. Start small, start slow. Read, watch, and learn. You've got quite a ways to go before you're equipped to be ready for adminship. Try to move too fast, and you'll only set yourself back, hurt the project, and make enemies. —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 22:00, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, but I'm still seeing a problem. Fact is, in your eagerness to dive into Wikipedia, you very well might have made some edits that are considered vandalism. The Wikipedia vandalism policy makes a distinction between willfully disruptive edits and good-faith edits that happen to contravene Wikipedia policy, but the demarcation isn't necessarily as clearly defined as it might seem. An editor who consistently refuses to learn the rules is being disruptive just as willfully as an editor who knows the rules and chooses not to follow them. In short, ignorance is not a valid excuse. I repeat myself: Slow down. Stop, look, and listen. Hang back. Read up on policy. Watch what more experienced editors are doing. And think about articulating your reason(s) for wanting to be an admin. (this message is also on my talk page) —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 22:33, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What are you trying to do?

I have no idea what you are trying to accomplish on the Plymouth/Chrysler Voyager articles. Explain it to me, and I'll help. If you keep up blanking and renaming and redirecting randomly, you are going to wind up blocked.Kww (talk) 22:11, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

The advice you got above to slow down wasn't too bad, actually ... you're trying to sprint when it's still crawling time. So, the situation is that right now, there should be a Chrysler Voyager article set to what it was before you started, and Plymouth Voyager article that looks like it did before you started, and no "Chrysler and Plymouth Voyager" article?Kww (talk) 22:26, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Everything Pop.JPG

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Everything Pop.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:06, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Easy instructions. I think that's a picture from your own camera. If it is, edit the image file and add {{GFDL-self}} to it. That tells Wikipedia that it's a picture that you own, and are licensing it for Wikipedia and anyone that copies things from Wiki. If it's not from your own camera, please don't do that.Kww (talk) 14:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Disney's Pop Century Resort 3.JPG

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Disney's Pop Century Resort 3.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Everything Pop 2.JPG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Everything Pop.JPG. The copy called Image:Everything Pop.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot (talk) 14:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Disney's Pop Century Resort 3 2.JPG

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Disney's Pop Century Resort 3 2.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Disney's Pop Century Resort 3 2.JPG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Disney's Pop Century Resort 3.JPG. The copy called Image:Disney's Pop Century Resort 3.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot (talk) 14:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion warning by bot

This is just to inform you that the speedy deletion tag that was placed on Chrysler Aspen (Hybrid) was inserted by an experimental bot which was stopped only three hours after its first run and is unlikely to be reactivated. Your article is appropriate for Wikipedia. Happy editing. --Blanchardb-Me•MyEars•MyMouth-timed 05:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Chrysler Aspen Hybrid

I have nominated Chrysler Aspen Hybrid, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chrysler Aspen Hybrid. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page. Scheinwerfermann (talk) 22:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Inappropriate template removal

Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Chrysler Aspen (Hybrid), without explaining the reason for the removal in the edit summary. Unexplained removal of content does not appear constructive, and your edit has been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox for test edits. Thank you. It is considered vandalism to remove valid templates as you did here. Scheinwerfermann (talk) 22:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Redirects, not new articles

68DANNY2, please stop creating new articles for vehicle submodels. I understand that you probably are trying to make sure that somebody who searches Wikipedia for "Dodge Durango Hybrid" gets an article instead of a no-such-article page, but this isn't how we do that. There is a mechanism in Wikipedia particularly for handling that, and it's called a redirect. To redirect page A (the redirecting page) to a different page B (the target page), enter the following redirecting command at the top of the redirecting page.

#REDIRECT [[NAME OF PAGE B]]

For example, to redirect the Cambridge University page (redirecting page) to the University of Cambridge page (target page), edit the Cambridge University page and enter:

#REDIRECT [[University of Cambridge]]

You can also redirect to page sections within an article. See Meta:Help:Redirect#A redirect to an anchor:

#REDIRECT [[University of Cambridge#History]]


Thus, Dodge Durango Hybrid has now been made into a redirect page that leads to Dodge Durango#Hybrid. Anyone who gets on Wikipedia and searches for Dodge Durango Hybrid will be taken directly to the Hybrid section of the Dodge Durango article.

Please also remember that on Wikipedia, we must always cite our reliable sources for the assertions we add to an article. This is true for all assertions in all articles, and it is particularly crucial in articles such as these you've been working on, which involve a great deal of crystal-ball speculation. —Scheinwerfermann (talk) 23:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD Nomination: WDW Resorts

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but all Wikipedia articles must meet our criteria for inclusion (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Since it does not seem that WDW Resorts meets these criteria, an editor has started a discussion about whether this article should be kept or deleted.

Your opinion on whether this article meets the inclusion criteria is welcome. Please contribute to the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WDW Resorts. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them.

Discussions such as these usually last five days. In the meantime, you are free to edit the content of the article. Please do not remove the "articles for deletion" template (the box at the top). When the discussion has concluded, a neutral third party will consider all comments and decide whether or not to delete the article. —Whoville (talk) 12:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:WebDSC08749 small.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:WebDSC08749 small.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:WebDSC08488 small.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:WebDSC08488 small.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:1177188986 9433ebe64e m.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:1177188986 9433ebe64e m.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:2056997297 693f2879b1 m.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:2056997297 693f2879b1 m.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 19:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Images

Please refrain from uploading or using any more images until you have read and understood WP:IUP and WP:FUC. You are not permitted to use a fair-use image solely to depict a living person and your justification, that the particular image is not available under a free license, is entirely insufficient. --Yamla (talk) 20:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:09-Disney-Hollywood-Studios-Entrance.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:09-Disney-Hollywood-Studios-Entrance.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:39, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:The Sorcerer's Hat In Disney's Hollywood Studios.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:The Sorcerer's Hat In Disney's Hollywood Studios.gif. 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Replacing free images with non-free images

Free images, which have a clear use status, are prefered by policy at Wikipedia over images with unclear copyright status, or those which are themselves copyright. Please see WP:IUP. Please stop replacing free images with those that are not free. Continuing to do so will be seen as disruptive, and may result in your being blocked. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Moves

Your page moves are inappropriate. Articles on people are generally listed under the name they are most widely known by. --Yamla (talk) 21:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Miley Cyrus

Read your source ... she had filed papers to change her name. No judge has approved the name change yet.Kww (talk) 21:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Again, read more closely. Your sources say that the request to change her name has officially been made. It has not been granted. It usually takes about 90 days from request to grant, so I would expect the process to be complete in June or July.Kww (talk) 15:28, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:2008 All-New Dodge Grand Caravan.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:2008 All-New Dodge Grand Caravan.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. BJBot (talk) 12:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Adminship

Please have that page deleted (replace it's contents with {{db-author}} to do it). You really aren't ready yet, and this will just get embarrassing. Try again in a year if you still want it. Doing it now will lead to failure, and will be hard to get around later when you do have a chance for succeeding.Kww (talk) 21:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Disney's Hollywood Studios Guidemap.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Disney's Hollywood Studios Guidemap.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).