User talk:Smooth0707

I didnt add that much to his article about his faith other than this edit Controversy: "Many of Sizzla's songs contain anti-gay lyrics."→"Multiple songs contain anti-gay lyrics, as followers of the Rastafarian Movement oppose homosexuality". Looking back at the article I can see that more stuff was added to it about his religion. I added the Judgement Yard stuff because its his yard :D. I'll continue to edit/add/improve it and hope you do the same! Its always good to learn something new about Sizzla! Freecharlesgrace (talk) 01:50, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a while since I replied to your query on the rickshaw image talk page... Maybe you've read it, but if not, you might be interested to follow the link to the article on hand-coloured photographs. Ciao! Pinkville (talk) 14:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Doomed (film), 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/Doomed (film). 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 04:41, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your request has been performed and a userbox for Rastafarians has been created. Please let me know if there are any problems or if there is anything else I can do. Adam McCormick (talk) 14:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the creation! Big improvement, many thanks. smooth0⁷0₇ (talk) 23:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your very welcome! Adam McCormick (talk) 23:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Smooth0707,

You made a few errors in your creation of your PPR nomination. I have fixed them up for you - see here and here. Please read the instructions carefully - if you're unsure I can try to help out. Thanks for your contribution. --jjron (talk) 09:56, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Critter was about ¾inch long. It does not seem to be fully grown. Thanks in advance for your help!!!

Wyatt915? 03:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Cesarian the moment of birth3.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 04:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you recently added a picture to the Pink Floyd article, and had some questions about its validity, which I asked about here:

Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#New picture in article (Pink Floyd pig)

It seems my question has been answered and resolved for the moment (and it turns out I misunderstood the caption; my apologies) but you may want to check if something still needs to be done about the licensing. (I'm also notifying User:Yarl who I think uploaded it, and it's really more of his concern, but I thought you should know.) --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 21:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The pig is from the Spanish wiki, here, also a featured article, and it has been checked for validity. smooth0⁷0₇ (talk) 13:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, it looks like we don't need to do anything. But to explain it further... User:Tombomp noticed a problem with the copyright designation. The presumed author of the picture, using the name janusz I on Flickr, and User:Yarl on WP, originally loaded it to Flickr and declared it to be copyright free, then loaded it to WP Commons, which can only be done with uncopyrighted pictures. The uploading instructions say that if a picture is copyrighted, it can't be loaded to Commons, but users can get around this by uploading directly to WP. That was not done in this instance. After the picture was uploaded to Commons, the author apparently changed his mind, and slapped a copyright on it at Flickr. The problem for the author is that his picture may not be protected. Someone could rip it off and say that the copyright tag isn't valid, because the author also declared it copyright free by the act of uploading it to Commons. So the author isn't doing himself any favours by declaring it copyright free in one place, and saying it has a copyright in another. Since it's doubtful anyone is going to challenge the picture's residence on Commons at this time, it's not an urgent problem, but I thought it would be a courtesy to let the author know his copyright declaration has a loophole. And I thought I'd let you know, as the person who inserted it in an article, since the picture could disappear from Commons in future if someone notices the problem a second time, and the author is no longer around to fix it. Sorry for the long explanation. I don't know much about copyrights myself; the above is my interpretation of what I read from the discussion. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 15:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When you move an article, there's a box you can check to move the talk page too. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:54, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mind telling me what you are doing? Cut and paste moves are frowned upon. Alientraveller (talk) 15:00, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the edit summary thing; I was in copy edit mode. To put it short, the war dog article is overly long for its subject matter; there's not really a need to summarize the domestication of dogs when you can hop on over to the main article about dogs. Some of the other stuff is non sequitur, seemingly stuffed in there to make the article longer than it needs to be. I'll do it right this time. ClockwerkMao (talk) 15:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey smooth, I was going though FPC and I saw that the coca cola logo was still pending on the restoration. I wanted to know if you have heard from anyone that is willing to restore it. If you have not, I'll try my hand at it later today until I am finished. The nomination has been suspended for over five days and would like it to be concluded soon. victorrocha (talk) 06:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Check the FPC page. victorrocha (talk) 18:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock lifted. GBT/C 21:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply] Request handled by: GBT/C 21:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At least, I think so...I don't think I've ever lifted an autoblock before...please make a test edit to the sanbox just to be sure. _GB^T/C 21:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Image_workshop#Coca_cola_advertisement

I added two pictures to the page and please see them. Contact me for more pics. 5dsddddd (talk) 19:21, 24 July 2008 (UTC) =D Im in a rush[reply]

Part of the problem I suppose here is that the definition of consensus seems to be incredibly vague. I understand the whole not voting thing but at the same time, there was a significant number of people who supported vs those who opposed. Who determines where the tipping point is? --Hetar 21:34, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]