User talk:Johnbibby

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lady Howard of Effingham

Proteus changed this. I concur with his changes. The original title 'Lady Effingham' was incorrect. Her step-mother-in-law, Madeline, Countess of Effingham, could be addressed as "Lady Effingham", but not the wife of the eldest son of the Earl of Effingham. She was "Lady Howard of Effingham", to show that she was not the wife of a peer, but the wife of his eldest son, who had the courtesy title of "Lord Howard of Effingham".

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Manci_Howard%2C_Lady_Howard_of_Effingham"

Contents

[edit] Sudan

Hi. I greatly appreciate your efforts to help Wikipedia curb vandalism. Please, however, do not add large letters into the page: "VANDALISM WAS THE FOLLOWING:". You may want to see WP:VANDAL, especially the section "Dealing with vandalism". Thanks, Storkk 21:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I also, of course, realize that it wasn't you that added it in the first place, but please be conscious of how you revert. :-) Thanks, Storkk 21:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] York

If you could provide some reliable sources to back up your claims for the page, I would have no qualms about adding the information back in. --Wafulz 20:34, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what 'claims' you are referring to....
Have you confused me with another user? Johnbibby 20:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm talking about this edit on my talk page. --Wafulz 01:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but the 'claims' were not mine - they were put in by somebody else. I was simply stating a view that it wd have been beter to develop the idea than to delete it.
Johnbibby 08:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hull Literary and Philosophical Society

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions to the Hull Literary and Philosophical Society article, but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing!Grutness...wha? 00:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Grutness. (I too was born in Barnet - lived near Ravenscrpft park!!)
I came back to re-edit the narticle today and it seems to have disappeared! - where has it gone to?
(I don't thnk it offended the copyright esp. as I have been in touch with the copyright holder. But anyhow i am happy to edit it so ti is OK if it can be reinstalled!
Johnbibby 17:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi John - small world! We may even have both gone to the same school (Foulds) - I lived up towards Hadley Common. As far as the article is concerned, I listed it on the copyright problems page and it's been deleted, by the look of it (which is what normally happens if the material's copyrighted). If you've got permission to use the material, though, it's a case where undeletion's likely to be warranted, so you could list it at WP:DRV. The other possibility would just be to write it again. In either case, if you've got permission, you should note that on the article's talk page so that it doesn't look like it's breaking copyright. Grutness...wha? 04:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I went to Underhill and then to QEGS.

Not sure where the articles gone to .... I spent some time last night trying to fix it - where will it be now?

Johnbibby 07:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Peregrine Lascelles epitaph CIMG6155.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Peregrine Lascelles epitaph CIMG6155.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:11, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit of Cambridge University Library

Your change to the page Cambridge University Library was determined to be unhelpful, and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. Thanks. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 13:43, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

My apologies if it was a valid edit. It appeared to me that you had entered something and then tried to back out most (but not all) of the changes. I almost didn't send the comment to you, since it looked like you had been making productive edits. If that is the case, then welcome to wikipedia and thanks for helping. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 15:41, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cachoeira

I removed the link to the Portuguese article because it was already linked at the top with a [[pt:Cachoeira (Bahia)]]. It was redundant, unless the text with translated. However, this is not the case, since I wrote the article based on 1911 encyclopaedia brittanica. - SpLoT / (talk) 17:21, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

It's ok, don't worry. Good that you clarified. Keep up the good work. - SpLoT / (talk) 17:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warnings

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia by creating the page B.O.O.K. Your test worked, and has been or will soon be removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --ArmadilloFromHell 15:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Book (disambiguation). It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --ArmadilloFromHell 15:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Timbuktu

Hi - thanks for cleaning up your addition to the article. I initially removed it, as it didn't seem to make sense and it linked to xxx - this made me suspect that it was vandalism. Warofdreams talk 01:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wahabbism

Im slightly concerned by the edits you made to this article, Ive made one change but want to discuss what should be done about the rest.

--Mazzarin 11:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not an expert Mazzarin - I suggest you just go ahead and make the changes - if you want to copy them here too, then I will be sure to look at them.

Cheers & thanks for writing

Johnbibby 20:41, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abraham crocker

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions to the Abraham crocker article, but for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

Feel free to re-submit a new version of the article. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I irrevocably release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later, for use on Wikipedia and elsewhere."

You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here. You can also leave a message on my talk page. NickelShoe (Talk) 22:57, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Tangram

Hi, I reverted your recent two edits to the Tangram article, because the first of your two edits resulted in the blanking of nearly the entire article. I'm assuming this was accidental. If you had some constructive edits to make, feel free to go back to the article and try again, ensuring that you do not remove large parts of the article by mistake. Phidauex 21:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


Sorry - I don't know how I did that!
Johnbibby 21:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of project management software

Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia, but unfortunately the commercial links you added to the page List of project management software were inappropriate -- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and should not be used for advertising or a collection of external links. See also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and the notability guidelines for corporations. Thanks. -- Renesis (talk) 23:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

===========
Hi Renesis.

I have no association with the given company, but the software is important.

Other software items are already listed.

Many links on Wikipedia refer to commercial products - indeed I often use it for precisely this reason.

Are you sure you are acting correctly?

Regards

Johnbibby 09:47, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi John, thanks for your question. This is a common problem - users want Wikipedia to be useful, and therefore in good faith add links to software products they feel are notable. However, we should be careful to abide by several policies and guidelines concerning external links and software products. Firstly, Wikipedia is not a web directory, or collection of links. See also WP:EL and WP:SPAM for more information about external links. Also, commercial products mentioned on Wikipedia must be notable. For this reason, we have limited the page List of project management software to include only links to articles. If you can tell why the product is notable and cite reliable sources, you are welcome to begin an article about the product. Before doing so, please be sure it qualifies under the notability guidelines at WP:CORP. Thanks again. -- Renesis (talk) 10:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


The article alredy includes the following references:

  • Cando Projects
  • Microsoft Project
  • MPMM
  • Planisware OPX2
  • Primavera
  • Phoenix Project Manager

None of these have links.

The software I listed is used throughout the health service in the UK. I guess it is a UK product while the others are from the USA. Is this another case of the small-boy being hounded out of the market because he/she is not 'notable'?

I don't know what you mean by saying those don't have links. If you are saying they don't have articles, you are wrong. If you are saying they are not external (non-wikipedia) links, that is exactly what we want. I don't have time for ridiculous arguments about UK vs USA. I gave you several links above to read, which you obviously have not done. If the product is in fact not notable, I don't understand why you think it "deserves" to be covered on Wikipedia, just because it exists. -- Renesis (talk) 17:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


I'm not an expert in this area - I may be better informed after a course next week.

Johnbibby
John, Do you need some help with this?--Nowa 02:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] George W. Hart

I just put up an article on George W. Hart. Care to add anything?--Nowa 21:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] modulo

In this edit, why in the world are you writing "modulus" rather than "modulo"? That's weird. "Modulo" is the correct ablative case and goes back to Gauss himself, and is what everyone else says. It's virtually become a part of vernacular English. Michael Hardy 02:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


I don't have strong feelings either way. I sense that when I learnt this stuff in the 50's, everyone was very precise about the ablative etc. nananana, but nowadays people are much more laid back.

It seems I wrote 'modiulus', but that was just a typo.

Generally I would say and write 'mod' as abbreviation for either modulus AND modulo. It is tricky if the same abbreviation is used for both words.

However, whatever word we use, it seems to have several meanings (see mathworld.com) e.g. the base of the modular algebra and also the binary function a mod b.

I'm happy for my word-endings to be edited .... anything for the sake of greater clarity!

Greetings .....'
Johnbibby 08:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Karl Pearson

You don't put pictures of someone's grave before the picture of the person. If you don't know how to use images on Wikipedia correctly please see the Wikipedia:Manual of style or Wikipedia:Image use policy. I have put it in a more appropriate place in the article, it looked awful at the top of it next to the main infobox. --24.147.86.187 15:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that seems fine.
Johnbibby 17:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Robert Sutherland Rattray

I nominated the article for deletion because I cannot find any information on him via Google and there is no biographical information in the article. If you can expand the article, please do so. However, as it currently stands, the article states Rattray's name and lists his work. That does not assert notability. — BrotherFlounder (aka DiegoTehMexican) 17:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] quadratic residues and theorems about them

Hello,

I have reverted two of your edits on quadratic reciprocity and quadratic residue. There are many notations in use to express the concept of quadratic residue, and the one used in Hardy and Wright (which is actually the notation used by Gauß in Disquisitiones Arithmeticae) is far from the most common one. More importantly, I felt that the comments were somewhat unfortunately placed in the intro sections of both articles---given that notation is not essential to either concept, this did not seem to be the appropriate place.


sincerely yours, Lenthe 19:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for pointing this out: I did not know that Gauss used the notation. However, I do not think that is sufficient reason for taking it out.

The "R" and "N" notation are much clearer than the usual mathematical notation. Please remember, this is a general encyclopedia, not one for mathematicians. So it is important that the beginning of each article states succinctly in terms that the general reader will understand.

I'd appreciate if you would edit and improve my edits, rather than peremptorily remove them.

Thanks

Johnbibby

[edit] Israel

I reverted your edit because it is not the only country in the world that defines itself according to a particular religion. Other examples include the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, the Islamic Republic of Mauritania and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 23:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

A "Jew" is not necessarilly an adherent of the religion Judaism. See Who is a Jew? for more information about that. The point is that Israel being a Jewish state has less to do with the Jewish religion (Judaism) as it does with the defined ethnic groups identified as being compnents of the Jewish people. It's more of an ethnic or cultural definition than a religious thing. Kari Hazzard (T | C) 23:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
You're welcome to modify your edit with the appropriate changes and commit it. I don't own the article and have no control over the edits you make beyond my personal decision as far as whether or not I feel they are in line with fact and Wikipedia policies. If I disagree with your edit, I can revert it, but you can revert my edits too. If we can't resolve a dispute, we have an edit conflict that we need to discuss to work out. If you're going to make some changes to the wording of your original edit, go for it. Remember, be bold. :) Kari Hazzard (T | C) 23:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Early photographers of York

This doesn't seem like an article; it only has links. There's also no context to indicate what "early" and "York" mean (there is more than one York in this world.) If you wanted to create a list, please read the guidelines at WP:LIST. It'll prevent more trouble down the line. ColourBurst 15:25, 11 February 2007 (UTC) Superscript text

[edit] Hi

I went to your talk page whilst stub sorting. Whilst I decided not to mention about stubs, as your mnemonic was difficult for me to sort, so I'm not suprised you used {{stub}} I noticed that the welcome message has gone AWOL.

If you want to sort this out I did it by using the babel template and putting in an extra

  {|
   |}

For you, overall, it would look like:

{{Babel|en|de-2|fr-2|es-1}}

{|
<!-- Template from Template:Welcomeg -->
...rest of template left in place...
<!--Template:Welcomeg-->
|}

Just in case it helps. Ksbrowntalk 21:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lieutenant Colonel William Steele

I moved the page Lieutenant Colonel William Steele to William Steele (military) since ranks and titles should not appear in article titles. For instance, Bill Clinton is not listed as President Bill Clinton. That link just redirects to the actual title of "Bill Clinton" Dismas|(talk) 19:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Keypict

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Keypict, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. — iridescenti (talk to me!) 15:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gascoigne family - removed PROD tag

Regarding the above, I have left a note on the Gascoigne family article's talk page. HeartofaDog 03:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wonk?

It seems you added the meaning of "wonk" as a one-tined fork. Do you have a reference for that? It doesn't sound at all encyclopaedic to me. If I don't hear from you, I plan to delete it... LachlanA 05:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spam in Patrice Warrener

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Patrice Warrener, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Patrice Warrener is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Patrice Warrener, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Patrice Warrener itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 22:37, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Okay

It's not ready for main article space yet. Check out user:Johnbibby/Functional mathematics; when it's done, then you can move it back out into mainspace. DS 14:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Little context in Online subscription-based revision service

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Online subscription-based revision service, by MAJ5 (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Online subscription-based revision service is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Online subscription-based revision service, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Online subscription-based revision service itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 17:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Roof

Hi John! I just took a look at the roof article, and really, that sort of editting is the kind of thing that brand new editors do, but you've been around for a while! Problems:-

  • You didn't look at the layout first. There was a tidy row of pics all the same size and with similar headings. Five pics all entitled "The roofs of..." You put two completely out-of-context pics in the middle of them.
  • You didn't read the Table of Contents, let alone the article to see if the information you were adding was there. There was, further down the page, a list of roof shapes. The section that you pushed further down was very basic and general information pertaining to all roofs of every shape. It belonged where it was.
  • You obviously didn't use the "Show preview" option, or really LOOK at the effect of your edits, because if you did, you would have found that they had created a 600mm gap in the writing. You can't do that to an article. It's like leaving one section of the flipping roof untiled and open to the weather! In other words, the pictures simply would not fit into an article that had been laid out in order to already have the maximum number of pictures possible.

Both the pictures are good, but because of space, the one construction picture simply won't go in. The pic could be improved for the purpose of addition by serious cropping, that is, remove most of the sky, and most of the hurricane fence and just show the relevant bit, the roof.

I think what i will do is simply start a new article on roof construction and call for tenders to finish it! That would be the best palce for your construction photo.

We have an additional problem here in that the roof article, and particularly the construction side has been mainly done by Aussies. We've got to keep a balance here. Amandajm 15:37, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Roof construction

calling for tenders... can you take a look at the talk page for Roof and the above article and make comments/suggestions? I'm planning on deleting that part which I have transferred. Amandajm 16:38, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Ivor Wilks

A tag has been placed on Ivor Wilks, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD A7.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Cruftbane 15:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

LISTS HIS POUBLICATIONS - he is an eminent reseacrher and has been for 50 years or more. Pleaqse don't delete.

Johnbibby 21:21, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I've restored it. Users like "Cruftbane" wouldn't know Shakespeare from a hole in the ground. Michael Hardy 22:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

  • That is false, and a personal attack. Read the essay. "Ivor Wilks is a noted British Africanist, with a specialism in Ghana." The stub tag weas longer than the content! Where is the claim of notability? I advised Johnbibby how to fix it, by creating an article with a claim of notability. Instead, you restired the article with no claim of notability, added "he wrote a dozen books" (big deal, that's what academics do), and I would be prepared to wager a small sum that it will remain in that pitiful state for a very long time. What, precisely, would be the problem with Johnbibby, who clearly knows something about the aubject, creating an article that, you know, tells people something about him? Like establishing the importance of the subject, from independent sources? Or discussing the degree of authority his books have? I'm more than happy to believe he is notable, but when I find an unsourced article on a living individual with no content, I see a problem waiting to happen. Why do you think we have the CSD A7 template, for people with no assertion of notability? All the article said was that he exists, which is really not enough. There are almost no articles linking to this, and virtually no content even now. You might get frustrated with "people like me" but I can tell you that I get frustrated by people who mount an aggressive defence of an article that they are not prepared to expand beyond a single sentence. So how about some actual content? Cruftbane 07:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

It is absurd to say that it only asserted that he exists. Anyone with any common sense would have suspected notability. If it's not expanded beyond its present state, it's still useful. A reference book on a shelf next to me says: "Crispi, Francesco (1819–1901). Italian statesman." That's all it says on that subject. The book was written by very sober and very learned people. They did not err in thinking that things like that are useful. Michael Hardy 22:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

  • So you're going to continue to be rude, aggressive and unapologetic. Jolly good, I'll leave you to it then. Cruftbane 22:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

You'd better take some people at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion to task for being rude, aggressive, and unapologetic, since some of them are saying the same things about you. You deleted an article that contained an assertion of notability on the grounds that it contained no assertion of notability. Michael Hardy 00:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

  • I've read these criticisms, but I think they are aimed at other people - not me. My 'guilt' was to start an over-small stub (Ivor Wilks). I confess guilty to that. It's now a bit longer but still needs strengthening. Too bad that a world-class Africanist receievs all this hassle while 10-th rate baseball or guitar-players have long articles.
Johnbibby 15:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
As it happens I completely agree. The fundamental problem, though, is that the fans of the guitarist write reams of crap about their idol, and in among those reams are at least a few nuggets of interest or significance. The stub you created on Wilks had no hook whatsoever. Take a look at the "Did You Know" section, WP:DYK. It's a good idea to model a new article on the DYK criteria - an interesting fact, a "hook", with an inline citation to support it, and a minimum of a few hundred characters. Of course that's beyond a stub, but it gives you the idea - make it interesting enough to actually attract people and perhaps even motivate them to look up more about the guy. "Ivor Wilks is a noted British Africanist with a specialisation in Ghana" is not even remotely compelling, I'm afraid. Oh, one last thing: several times it's been said that I deleted something. No I didn't. Only a sysop can delete. That means at least two people independently formed the same judgment. Cruftbane 20:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Are your The John Bibby?

Hi just spotted your edit to Kantilal Mardia and was wondering if you were the John Bibby of

Multivariate Analysis (coauthored with John T. Kent and John Bibby)

If so a belated welcome to wikipedia. I also worked with John and Kanti. --Salix alba (talk) 15:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


Hello Johnbibby! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! Runcorn 19:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Getting Started
Getting your info out there
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Getting Help
Getting along
Getting technical

[edit] Scivee

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Scivee, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.scivee.tv/node/2006. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 15:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


I amended it from the CORDIS website of press releases - which of oucrse are intende to be copied!

Johnbibby 15:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


Hi again - I see it has been deleted .... PLEASE DO NOT DO THIS. Please see the above .... It is all perfectly in order!

Johnbibby 15:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
No, a copy of a press release is not an appropriate addition to Wikipedia. The reason is that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not an advertising outlet. Press releases don't provide the kinds of sources and details about notability that encyclopedias do, and they don't have an appropriately neutral tone. In addition, please remember that comments to other users go on our talk pages... not on our userpages. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Speedy deletion of ITreviews

A tag has been placed on ITreviews, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD A7.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Hazel77 14:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sir Jim Rose

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Sir Jim Rose, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/phonics/earlyreading. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 19:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sir Jim Rose

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Sir Jim Rose, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/phonics/earlyreading. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 19:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright problem: Sir Jim Rose

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Sir Jim Rose, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/phonics/earlyreading, http://www.qca.org.uk/qca_8729.aspx, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

  • If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Sir Jim Rose and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
  • If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Sir Jim Rose with a link to where we can find that note.
  • If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Sir Jim Rose.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:Sir Jim Rose/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:Sir Jim Rose saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! — madman bum and angel 20:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Obelisk to the 7th Earl of Carlisle (detail).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Obelisk to the 7th Earl of Carlisle (detail).jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Mexico fires.bmp.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mexico fires.bmp.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:08, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sewall Wright

Hello Johnbibby. Thanks for your recent addition to the Sewall Wright, about his family's ancestry. My sense is that you probably have access to a book where this information can be found. Is it possible you could add a reference to the book? Otherwise the information risks getting removed in some future rule-enforcement exercise. Also your remark about his 'genes of past success' might need to be toned down, due to WP:PEACOCK. EdJohnston 01:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] On Target Earnings

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to On Target Earnings, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. This is especially important when dealing with biographies of living people, but applies to all Wikipedia articles. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are already familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Thank you. --Busy Stubber 14:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MatheMagic on AfD

Hi John, Not sure if your aware but MatheMagic is on AfD. I see you had some thing to do with the group so maybe you can help establish its notability. --Salix alba (talk) 10:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I see it failed the AfD, must say I'm not too suprised. Anyway what do you think about a Mathematics popularization article, or similar. Digging around I find there are articles on Public awareness of science, Science outreach and Café Scientifique. --Salix alba (talk) 18:12, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Professor A. H. Halsey

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Professor A. H. Halsey, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/factual/desertislanddiscs_20030504.shtml. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 21:38, 23 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Speedy deletion of S.J.Madge

A tag has been placed on S.J.Madge requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it 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 assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, 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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sting_au Talk 12:49, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Little context in Hostal de los Reyes Catolicos

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Hostal de los Reyes Catolicos, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Hostal de los Reyes Catolicos is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Hostal de los Reyes Catolicos, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot 18:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Daniel duck

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Daniel duck, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.tvcm.co.uk/outlet/index.php/JohnCastillo/2006/02/27/rev_daniel_duck. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 14:08, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I can see no evidence that all of the text is old enough to be no longer subject to copyright, and hence have nominated for deletion with {{db-copyvio}}. If you feel that I have made a mistake, please use the {{hangon}} template and discuss on the talk page. Thanks, Jeodesic (talk) 14:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thomas Archer Hirst

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Thomas Archer Hirst, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Printonly/Hirst.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:53, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Romanesque architecture

Johnbibby, your edits to this article were not helpful. At the intro to the article were two photos chosen carefully from the several hundred available. They were similar format, similar proportion, similar colour and went together very vell. Moreover they were two of the mo