User talk:Anlace

• /Archive 1 Dec 9, 2005 to Mar 21, 2006 contains edit protocol, callan, arlington, peer review, pink floyd, FAC, reentry, childe hassam, air modeling, indoor air qualtiy, cities, rowena meeks abdy, environmental science template, xavier martinez, featured article candidates, noise pollution, etc.
• /Archive 2 Mar 21.2006 to present contains moss beach distillery, Lord Monboddo, porcelain, hydrology model images, croceum, Beverston Castle, Madagascar Dry Deciduous Forests, pollution, auks, environmental science template, point source, 2006 Zakouma elephant slaughter, animal courtship, sou calif, halltorp, endangered species, ethanol fuel, jepson flora
• User talk:Anlace/Archive 3 DYK, white ray pygmy daisy, barrel vault, environmental science, soil science, hickmans potentilla, santa cruz long toed salamander, cupressus, annadel,surface runoff, biodiversity action plan, quercus lobata, DYK destination hotel,DYK, Marin Dwarf Flax, DYK Lastenia conjugens, DYK, Dutch Masters, Noise Health Effects DYK, Soil conservation DYK, Monboddo, tidal power, DYK.
• User talk:Anlace/Archive 4 DYK, chillingham cattle; DYK Alby; DYK Brush Creek; DYK Phase I ESA; DYK halltorps, Elsie; central heating; honey bee; DYK molle; DYK pacific herring; DYK; overfishing, cockscomb; Lignt pollution; James Burnett, Lord Monboddo; red bellied lemur;environment barnstar.

Hi Anlace, thanks for all your work on the Environmental Science article. I would like to work with you to improve one part of the article, the 'terminology' section. The ways I think the section should change are that it makes ecology and environmental science sound like they investigate very different phenomena, when there are huge similarities. It also includes a statement that environmental science includes the investigation of abiotic factors " (such as air quality, water quality, soil chemistry)," which is true, but it implies that ecology does not include investigation of these factors, which is not true (for example, see the definitions of ecology here). I do like this part "in fact, many studies within environmental science address interactions of purely physical parameters and do not involve biological systems. One can consider "ecology" as a basic sub-category to environmental science in analyzing biological systems, both local and global scales." but perhaps we can re-word the sentences preceding these? Wevets 17:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi wevets. i welcome further clarifications to this area, as it is quite important. i think i agree with all the points you made above, and i shall attempt a first pass at fixing things along the lines you suggest. feel free to add or edit. best regards Anlace 18:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I gave a whack at trying out a new formation for the middle part. Take a look and see what you think: Environmental ScienceWevets 20:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't had a chance yet to read it in depth, but it looks fascinating, and a clear WP:FA candidate. Great job! Postdlf 18:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article over-illumination, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your work on this article! I agree, fascinating stuff. ++Lar: t/c 21:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have deleted a sentence because the citation is mostly irrelevant, but there is a relevant item (althought you have to look for it):

"These issues must also be considered from a wider international perspective, because it is likely that greater demand for biofuels in the EU will attract imports. Palm and soya bean oil are already being imported to the UK to produce biodiesel, and the duty incentive for bioethanol being introduced from January 2005 could see imports of bioethanol.

We are not aware of specific research on the broader international environmental impact of supplying bio-fuel feedstocks from outside the EU to meet growing EU demand. However, there are more widespread concerns about deforestation in some countries to meet growing demand for products such as palm oil. For example, although prohibited by Indonesian law, a 2002 WWF report stated that clearing of natural forest for palm oil tree plantations was continuing at an alarming rate, with devastating effects on biodiversity.

Clearly the UK would want to avoid an outcome whereby measures introduced to mitigate one environmental problem simultaneously resulted in significantly contributing to another. However, given the international nature of the problem, it is not clear whether there are real practical measures that might achieve this - at least in the short term."

This does illustrate a valid point which is still worth including in the article especially since it is not that hard to work out that growing something will require farmland. Man with two legs 10:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your assistance on the above. i had actually read the entire UK white papers on energy a month ago and had forgotten about this passage. i have restored the citation with a more factual NPOV reference to the rainforest, even though i think this whole point is more relevant to biodiesel than ethanol. are we really going to grow a lot of corn in Madagascar? cheers. Anlace 13:54, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I agree, it was POV in its last incarnation. Man with two legs 14:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that while the "Ankarana Special Reserve" section is well-referenced, the others, oddly, have only references 2 references total. Is there a reason for this? Kudos for writing such a nice article, still. Circeus 04:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i am impressed anyone noticed this fact! you are correct. i suppose lack of access has created an information vacuum to some of these forests in the northwest. for Anjajavy there was only one publication found. For Kirindy there is slightly more and i could have cited some of the other refs for Ankarana in the Kirindy section. thanks for your interest in the article circeus. Anlace 05:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to explain, but your message came first. The range of the couas should be under Coua, not cuckoo, otherwise it's a bit odd having the distribution of only one part of a very large family - similarly with the wagtail, where the distribution should be on the species page. I appreciate that you obviously have an interest in the madagascar forests, but that shouldn't overide a sensible format. jimfbleak 05:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You could put in at requested articles a request for Coua orand the wagtail species - I'd do a stub, but I lack a source for these. jimfbleak 05:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

these articles you mention are on my "to do" list :) Anlace 05:48, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

great, anything i can do to help, let me know. jimfbleak 06:29, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Madagascar dry deciduous forests, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 18:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Atmospheric sciences category is a top category of atmospheric science and contains mostly subcategories - incuding "meteorology" and "climatology". The light pollution article should not be in top category even if it was directly related to atmospheric sciences - otherwise we would have to have all atmospheric science articles there (hundreds). This is why we have subcategories. I added atmospheric and ocean optics to light pollution category so there is "atmosphere" relation of the article. What do you think? Pflatau 18:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it works for me :) thank you Anlace 18:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On November 25, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Marine Mammal Center, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 11:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On June 1, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Energy policy of the United Kingdom, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Spangineer^[es] (háblame) 12:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While reviewing your cleanup of routine vandalism to Petaluma, California I found this barnstar which had your name on it. Cheers, -Will Beback 09:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On June 11, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Diademed Sifaka, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

On June 16, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Polyphenol antioxidant, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 01:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On June 23, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hydrology transport model, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 11:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice article, great to see people adding articles with actual references! :) Stevage 12:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a few {{fact}} templates for statements refering to "previous research". I figure we might as well source these. Great article by the way. Circeus 04:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ive added the cite to the one i found. where is the other one? by the way i dont know the cite format editing to cite the same source twice and only have it appear once in the ref list. could you help me with that element? thanks for the kind words too circeus . regards. Anlace 04:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there was just one. I could have sworn I added two though... Oh well. As for reusing the same footnote, see Wikipedia:Footnotes#Multiple uses of the same footnote. Circeus 04:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, while copyediting the article, I found 3 extra locations appropriate for refs. Circeus 04:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

one more cite added. working on the last one. may take a while to find the best one. thanks for the repair on multiple cites to same ref. i couldnt figure out doing it from the wiki source you gave me. Anlace 05:02, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. As a WikiGnome, I spend a lot of time doing that kind of stuff. Circeus 05:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anlace, see my comments on your re-write at Talk:Central heating and thanks much for your prompt help. I think it best to carry on our dialogue there so all others can see our comments. - ~~

On July 1, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Total dissolved solids, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 15:12, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeh my thanks as well- interesting article. Petros471 10:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Beverston Castle, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

On 25 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kullaberg, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Great articles and the pictures were fabulous! I enjoyed the read. Many thanks -- Samir धर्म 07:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my question at the talk page for this article. Rmhermen 20:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 28 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Portlethen Moss, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Good work! You even made a Main Page appearance due to my goof-up ;) --Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 12:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 31 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Biodiversity Action Plan, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

You sir, are on a roll! Cheers --Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 05:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Life
		Well done for so quickly creating Biodiversity Action Plan and getting a main page link (the first ever barnstar I've awarded) Salix alba (talk) 10:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 4 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 2006 Zakouma elephant slaughter, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

A nice and timely article! Thanks for the contribution. I only hope Stephen Colbert won't take this as an opportunity to advocate for more elephant-based vandalism. Take care -- Samir धर्म 11:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sanborn Park, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Did you know? was updated. On 9 September, 2006, a fact from the article Line source, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Srikeit ^{(Talk | Email)} 15:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly agree that Linear source deserves the DYK for which you nominated it. It is a very well-written article. But since you wrote about 99% of the article, why did you credit me as the author of the article? Is it considered bad form for someone to nominate an article which was written by one's self? Regards, - mbeychok 19:26, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i like to see credit given to someone like you who creates great new articles all the time Anlace 02:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 28 September, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article water crisis, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

On 6 October, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sanitary sewer overflow, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

On 9 October, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article St Laurence Church, Ludlow, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Peta 05:13, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 9 October, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stora Alvaret, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Peta 23:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 October, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ythan Estuary, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Peta 23:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? was updated. On 19 October, 2006, a fact from the article sanitation, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Andrew Levine 19:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 October, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stonehaven Tolbooth, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Steve 01:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC) (The article was incorrectly attributed to me, so I've fixed the error. I merely nominated the fact --Steve)[reply]

On October 25, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Waterberg Biosphere, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks. I also think your gable nom needs a proper reference. Atm, it is just a extlink to an example of a gable, not a ref for the info.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the star and the reference comment. ive now added four new references to the article. Anlace 14:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On October 26, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Crow-stepped gable, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:09, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		A barnstar from Wizzy for Waterberg Biosphere as just one of many original articles created by User:Anlace

On 4 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sonoma Coast State Beach, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 00:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Anlace.. Since I have dozens of California-related pages on my watchlist, I've been watching you add assessments to various Sierra Nevada related pages. Thanks for your efforts, I know it is a lot of work.

I'm wondering if you may be assessing too harshly? For example, see Long Valley Caldera. I would that thought that was a B-class article. Yes, it doesn't have inline references (the reference section covers all of the sources used in that article), but it doesn't seem to be missing large sections.

I'm thinking of going back and changing some of your assessments, but I wanted to check with you first. hike395 20:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the added assessment notes on Long Valley Caldera. it just doesnt measure up to a B yet. there are very specific criteria for B standing within Wikipediia Project California. mainly long valley caldera needs more breadth of coverage...not just geology. i have been involved in reviewing and being reviewed for hundreds of Start vs B grade articles; i think you need to read carefully at least a couple of dozen solid Bs (for example California Condor, Caltrain, Mojave Desert, Coachella Valley) before finalizing your opinions. i would be delighted to debate any specific articles and certainly reconsider my findings. also if you have time for assessing i would suggest you start with the 9500 un-assessed articles in project california, and not just change things to quibble in the only 900 assessed articles. regards Anlace 22:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We can continue to discuss over at Long Valley Caldera for specifics. Unfortunately, I'm not that interested in all of California, just the parts near the Sierra Nevada. hike395 22:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Our collaboration at Long Valley Caldera worked well: it was easier to just fix the article than to engage in a long discussion over definitions. There are some other assessments which puzzle me: perhaps you can explain your assessments, and I can fix the articles?

• Owens Valley --- Start (needs a little more ecology discussion. How about ecology on higher slopes? something on mammals? native american interaction with ecosystem? practical implementation of Overgrazing reversal? also practical aspects of viewing the features and getting around the owens valley? by auto? by hiking? Anlace 15:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree: I'll try and dig up some material on Owens Valley ecology. It's pretty interesting, actually, I just need to do some research hike395

• San Andreas Fault --- Start (needs map and some in print references, not just on line) Anlace 15:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll see what I can dig up. hike395

• Mount Whitney --- Start (needs breadth by expanding geology, hydrology, ecology, history)Anlace 15:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sounds reasonable. hike395

Thanks! hike395 06:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your constructive dialog in improving these articles. none of these are far from B. my ideas are meant as avenues. you need not address each point to achieve the breadth needed. good luck in finding the expansion material. let me know if i can assist in any way. best regards. Anlace 15:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article California Mule Deer, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 10:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Calcot Manor, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On November 9, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Piperia yadonii, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks again foy your many contributionsBlnguyen (bananabucket) 23:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A fascinating and well-written article and, for me, a door to your many other articles. I've read half a dozen of them so far, all wonderful. I look forward to reading more when I have time. Thank you for your outstanding contributions to Wikipedia. -- technopilgrim 05:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Santa Rosa Creek, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 12:12, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to offer a hearty thank you for the tireless article assessments that you have been doing for all the articles that were recently tagged with the {{WikiProject California}} template.

I would like to ask a favor of you. For those articles that are primarily on Southern California topics, could you change them from {{WikiProject California}} to {{WikiProject Southern California}} as you do your assessments?

As a side note, as soon as I figure out how to do it, I am going to add to those two templates a couple of additional options that I found in the {{TrainsWikiProject}} template—specifically "unref" and "imageneeded". ^BlankVerse 12:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words. I shall try to make such tag changes for southern california. So is everyone on board with the implied asymetry? this implies California=Northern California, for the most part, since there are very few articles that span the domains of n and s calif. cheers. Anlace 15:44, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I tried rating a few articles. It's more work than I expected. Also, since as far as I have been able to determine, the assessments seem to be up to various WikiProjects, instead of a more organized effort like the Good article project, I've taken it upon myself to very occasionally reassess some of the assessments. For example, Katharine McPhee, an American Idol runner-up, may be currently semi-famous, but she's not that significant to Southern California IMHO, so I downgraded her from mid to low importance in the SoCal template. Junípero Serra, on the other hand, is more responsible than any other individual for the early development of California, and so I moved him from Mid to Top (someone else had already moved him from Low to Mid).

FYI: I originally created the California WikiProject just so that the Southern California WikiProject would have a proper parent. I wasn't going to create a half-assed bare-bones project though, so I fully populated it and have continued to help develop the WikiProject. I did think about also creating a Northern California WikiProject at the same time as the SoCal WP, but if I had, it would have probably been an empty placeholder WikiProject, so I decided against it. When the members of the California WikiProject decide that there should also be a Northern California WikiProject, I'll help create one. Until then, the Cal WP is covering both Northern Calif + statewide topics.

There are a few topics, such as the featured article Geology of the Death Valley area and the world class city Los Angeles, California that are important statewide as well as locally, and should probably be listed with both WikiProjects. ^BlankVerse 15:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: If you are still doing any California WikiProject assessments, the templates for both Calif WikiProjects now have the "unref", "imageneeded", and "imagedetails" parameters. ^BlankVerse 09:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Horne Church, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 22:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 17 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article California slender salamander, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--P.K.Niyogi 13:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 19 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Barrel vault, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 18:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anlace - nice work on Cupressus pigmaea. I've started a similar page for C. abramsiana, if you want to add anything (can you get a photo, too?). One small point on the C. goveniana page, your note "More modern taxonomic thinking classifies Mendocino Cypress as a separate species" isn't true, it remains much disputed (as it has right from the start!) and a matter of opinion rather than hard fact, with some leading conifer taxonomists (e.g. Eckenwalder, Farjon) still treating it in C. goveniana. I'll re-work the C. goveniana page (probably tomorrow) to bring it into line with the other two. Then on to splitting up the C. arizonica complex . . . - MPF 00:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your good additions to the pigmaea article. i agree with your net assessment of the taxonomy. i dont know much about abramsiana and have no photos of it, but i ll keep my eyes open. Anlace 01:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! - MPF 01:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Anlace, I noticed your expansions of barrel vault and groin vault and wanted to say thanks and give my compliments to you. I also noticed that your userpage says that you have a degree in physics and have authored some pages related to Californian topics. I mention this because I am translating an article from the Japanese Wikipedia on a little known architect / engineer named Tachu Naito (you can see the article in progress here User:DVD R W/内藤多仲) who was a pioneer in seismic design which also has no article. Are you familiar with the topic? I know it is a big deal in Seattle, San Francisco, other Pacific Rim places and beyond. Would you like to help write this article about earthquake damage prevention in engineering? Regards, DVD+ R/W 06:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i am generally familiar with the topic, but certainly dont have the specialized skills of a seismic engineer. i dont know whether i can add much to the article you mention, but it seems like a worthwhile effort. you may want to examine the wikipedia article bay mud which has a good overview of seismic design on bay muds. regards Anlace 06:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I read bay mud since you mentioned it and will read it again later. I'm no seismic engineer myself, but might start the seismic design article after translating Tachu Naito. If you see it turn blue don't hesitate to add anything. DVD+ R/W 07:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think I should route these terms (seismic design, and seismic engineering) to seismic analysis. Does that sound like a better idea? DVD+ R/W 07:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Acanthomintha duttonii, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Many thanks for the contribution -- Samir धर्म 08:49, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On November 23, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cupressus pigmaea, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Great work again. You've earnt top billing!Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Groin vault, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 16:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anlace, nice work on the groin vault article it's taking shape. Just a little concern, most of the images shown are showing quadripartite rib vaults rather than groin vaults - check out this diagram, randomly pulled from the net. [1] there's a distinction with the ribbing. Perhaps we can find some alternative images so as not to confuse matters. --Mcginnly | Natter 17:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the kind words. i agree with you on the images issue. i didnt place the cloisters image there, but i think it's not correct here. i ll be on the lookout for better images...i have some possible sources. regards. Anlace 17:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some images I drew up for the groin article - feel free to junk them if you like - I can change them too - I'm proposing adding similar explanatory diagrams for all the vault diagrams so a debate about the 'look' of them would be good now rather than after I've worked out how to construct a star vault! Cheers. --Mcginnly | Natter 01:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

these images look great. thanks for the good work on drawing them. i'll incorporate into the groin article. cheers. Anlace 04:35, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On November 24, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eriophyllum latilobum, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Many thanks once again Anlace. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cirsium fontinale, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching this glaring error that never should have been and rectifying it ASAP. KP Botany 18:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 29 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Canyon live oak, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

For having the shortest nomination in the update (at an incredibly concise 11 words), you also get a big thank you from me :)--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 17:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anlace: First, congratulations on the "did you know" approval. But I do have a question: why is the article on Canyon live oak rated as High Importance? I'd think that it would only rate a 1, maybe a 2. Scoutersig 20:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is of course the ultimate question one asks....what constitutes importance? Within project California there are over 10,000 articles and ultimately about 10 percent will be rated as High priority (about one or two percent will become top priority). Look at the other california articles rated high: Ahwahnee Hotel, Hoover Tower, Bishop Pine. My own opinion is that canyon live oak easily merits the high designation as a tree of many uses and a tree that prehistorically had a dominant status in california, thus influencing evolution of many other species. this topic as all ratings are open to debate, but the "mid" category has some amazingly unimportant items like minor politicians, little known streams, etc. i stick by my assessment. let me know your thoughts. regards Anlace 23:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I think that you're basing your rating off of what other people rated their articles; and we both agree that some of them (Read: "many of them") are rated too high, probably as a result of over-inflated egos. I don't think that's you at all; though I disagree with your rating and reasoning, your contributions show that you are a very good editor and contributor. Best of luck with the California articles especially! Scoutersig 15:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Scoutersig that there tends to be a lot of overinflation of ratings for articles--I would say most, not many. I agree, however, with Anlace's rating of this particular plant, atlhough not for the stated reasons. Q. chrysolepis occurs throughout most of California, and is the most prevalent of the Golden Oaks in California. The Golden Oaks are unusual parts of the flora of the southwestern US and of parts of Mexico. It is important for creating habitat and food in middle elevation forests for small animals throughout California. It is also an interesting tree because of certain growth habits (clones) and the extent of hybridization, I believe. I will look at the article, too, and see if I can add something that makes it seem more important to the average reader. The article should be clear, if it is rated as high importance, about what makes this species so imporant. If not, I will ask that the rating be changed. I would like to have seen this discussion on the talk page, and will paste it there if it arises again. KP Botany 17:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

well, i must be doing something right in the assessments, since an equal number of people have considered the assessments too lenient as too harsh. i havent seen anyone try to quantify the desired outcome distribution, but i think it should go something like: top-2 percent; high-10 percent; mid-30 percent; low-remainder. i think this outcome distribution really should be the focus of discussion. also i invite others to do more rating. it's rather a thankless but important task. cheers. Anlace 02:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankless? Good grief, must set reminder to thank you every day for doing it--thank you for doing these assessments, it will be much easier in the future for all editing of California articles to have these done. I wouldn't do it for money. And, yes, good assumption: half the people complain you're rating 'em too high, the other half too low, means you're probably right on the money. KP Botany 03:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankless? You've been thanked once already, but I'll thank you again. Having done more assessments, I realize it can be a rather tedious and boring task, yet you have to be conscientious about it.

As for Canyon live oak, I definitely agree, as someone with a degree in Biology, that it should be rated as high importance for the California WikiProject. ^BlankVerse 13:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On December 15, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Graham Creek, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Hello again Anlace. GeeJo must be following you around...Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anlace! I just want to say Merry Christmas to you! Have a nice holiday time. - Darwinek 19:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On December 21, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Laguna de Santa Rosa, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 22:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tiburon Jewelflower, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

-- I swear, you're like some kind of article-submitting robot. It's great to see Wikipedia's coverage on a topic like this expand so efficiently. Keep up the good work! GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 16:46, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On January 22, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Suisun Shrew, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 01:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know? was updated. On 24 January, 2007, a fact from the article Smith's blue butterfly, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 00:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the 14th, it was 3.1KB and tagged as as stub. On the 19th, Guetterda untagged it as it wasn't a stub (he was correct). It was expanded from 3.1KB to 8.5KB, but since it was not originally a stub expansion, I couldn't let it on DYK. Sorry. =( Nishkid64 21:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 January, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eriogonum parvifolium, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Savidan 00:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 January, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Anjajavy Forest, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Savidan 00:14, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 29 January, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nim Li Punit, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 10:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On January 30, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Palala River, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 21:08, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On January 31, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bodysgallen Hall, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 22:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On February 2, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Komati Gorge, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Awarded to Anlace for endless contributions to DYK of high quality.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On February 5, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Endangered arthropod, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Many thanks again Anlane for your contributions. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:15, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there Anlace, I remembered you have an engineering background - would you mind looking over what I've suggested to the editor in the last paragraph here - Architectural peer review - Chicago Spire. I've stepped out of my field a bit and an engineer's corrections and maybe pointing the editor to the right sources, would be most appreciated. Many thanks. --Mcginnly | Natter 14:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. ive posted my ideas on your talk page. Anlace 04:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On February 5, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Monkey River, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 21:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On February 7, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Calabazas Creek, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 21:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for welcoming me, Anlace. I expect it'll be a while before I summon up the confidence to contribute an article, but it's nice to know I can pester you if I get stuck! Piepacker 15:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the merger work. The SEP article looks great! Unschool 14:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 14 February, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Seal Slough, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 13:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 February, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Colony Collapse Disorder, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 09:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello – Based on your significant contribution to one or more San Francisco Bay Area-related articles and/or stated interests on your homepage, I thought you might be interested in this project:

You have been invited to join the WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area, a collaborative effort focused on improving Wikipedia's coverage of the Bay Area. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading!

Peter G Werner 20:29, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't leave a more personal invitation last time. I see your name come up on practically every Bay Area-related article who's history I've checked. Your contributions on Bay Area natural history and geography have been huge and I think you'd be a valuable member of this project. Peter G Werner 21:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 16 February, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article San Bruno Creek, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 10:40, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Anlace, and welcome to WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles relevant to the Bay Area. Here are some points that may be helpful: Our main aim is to help improve Bay Area-related articles, so if people ask for help with an article, please try your hardest to help them if you are able. Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page. It is highly recommended that you watchlist it. The project has several ongoing and developing activities, such as article quality assessment, which you are welcome to participate. Our system for improving lower-quality articles is Jumpaclass. If you'll be editing stub, start, or B-class articles, consider using Jumpaclass to track your progress. If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to our translation section, to help us improve our foreign Bay Area topics. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We hope you enjoy working on this project.

I'm so glad you've now joined the project! — Emiellaiendiay 23:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On February 26, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Port of Redwood City, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 00:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Goat Rock Beach, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 07:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tolay Lake, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 13:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your very thorough review of the article! I appreciate it. — Emiellaiendiay 23:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great work Anlace! Have an award! —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-08 07:20Z

On 9 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fountaingrove Lake, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 11:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hereby award you this honor for your work during the Waste pond (neé Chemical pond) AfD discussion. ≈≈Carolfrog≈≈♦тос♦ 04:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 19 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Syncaris pacifica, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--

howcheng {chat} 06:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed reading this one. =) — coelacan — 04:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just found this. Thought you'd want to have a look at it. Circeus 22:18, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the heads up on this new article. i am not really familiar with the species, but i ve made a few obvious edits to contribute to cleanup. Anlace 22:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking on some editing of this article. It looks much better, although it still needs tons of work. KP Botany 20:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like you and the other editor have it under control, so I will unwatch it, as I just don't have the time to watch fringe articles. Let me know, if you remember, if it needs copyedit prior to GA or anything. KP Botany 04:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bennett Valley, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 19:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On March 27, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Macal River, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 03:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 28 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Seaport Centre, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 05:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Piner Creek, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 11:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do watch the other California wine growing regions, as you are able to, as I'm not certain that the folks at WikiProject Wine know anything about wine growing. I really don't think they understand what a wine country is, or the difference between wine country and Napa Valley (wine). This concerns me for this section of Wikipedia in general. KP Botany 07:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Regarding Limegreen's proposal, I shall try to keep an open mind, but i still think the onus is upon someone to produce a credible article on another world region, with sources, that calls for the question of renaming." Couldn't agree with you more on this. What a monumental waste of time to prep for articles that don't exist. However, part of the agreement was that we make Wine Country, for now, a redirect to Wine Country (California). It's just a compromise that allows for some give on our part, while maintaining Wikipedia in a usable manner, and moving away from discussing a nonstarter (no matter what the wine drinkers think). If you do the moves, don't forget to make this one Wine Country a redirect to Wine Country (California). KP Botany 17:21, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe they've given up, in which case, just leave it alone.[2] KP Botany 17:40, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just in case there could be any confusion, this edit summary, was in response to the vandalism I was reverting, and had nothing to do with your edit which happened in between. Jkelly 23:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Anlace! A few editors are getting together to create a task force with the goal of making sure environmental records of corporations and politicians are accurately and efficiently represented in relevant entries. Given your outstanding environmental edits, and your unusual level of expertise, I thought I'd bring your attention to this project. If you think it's a good idea, please consider chiming in on the discussion page. We hope to have a task force page up soon and of course would love to have you involved...Benzocane 22:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The task force is up and running, and I want to second Benzocane's invitation to come by and have a look! Cyrusc 22:07, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are being recruited by the Environmental Record Task Force, a collaborative project committed to accurately and consistently representing the environmental impact of policymakers, corporations, and institutions throughout the encyclopedia. Join us!

thanks for the invite. i applaud this noble effort, but have to decline involvement at the moment, due to personal time constraints and the fact that this specialized effort is not in the centroid of my experience. Anlace 22:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

I try to follow the standards laid out in Assessments as best I can and sometimes I find it hard to decide whether an article falls into a certain category. For example, Antioch Bridge is marked as a stub at the bottom of the article, which is confusing. I try to err on the side of the lower rating if I'm unsure. For the The Marine Mammal Center I assessed it as Start because WikiProject California had it as Start. I thought it would be strange to have one project rating higher than another and decided to err on the side of caution (wasn't feeling bold enough to upgrade both ratings). Feel free to reassess anything you come across that you think should have a higher rating. I'm still trying to get a feel for the whole process, and I guess sometimes I mess it up. =] MissMJ 06:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've nominated Sonoma County wineries, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Sonoma County wineries satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonoma County wineries and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Sonoma County wineries during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Blueboy96 19:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Bodysgalleninterior.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 21:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 21:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be specific, anonymous user Jbntj, who is not listed as a member of the project, posted a WikiProject Environment template of the Talk page of Fossil fuel power plant some time ago and also assessed it as a Stub Class. Is that proper? I cannot imagine anyone considering Fossil fuel power plant to be a Stub Class. It is a very large article with 16 sections, numerous diagrams, photos and references.

I might add that anonymous user Jbntj also added a WikiProject Climate Change template to Fossil fuel power plant, altho he is also not listed as a participant in that project.

And recently, he added a Cleanup tag to Fossil fuel power plant and refuses to explain why on the Talk page of that article other than to say the article is "dirty".

A very careful reading of the "Contributions" page of anonymous user Jbntj discloses that he has done this sort of thing on many energy related articles. In my opinion, he is very biased against use of coal or oil because he feels they bear a major responsibility for global warming. Wikipedia has dozens of articles devoted to global warming and climate change where anyone can contribute content or discuss their feelings about coal and oil. However, I don't believe posting WikiProject templates on technical articles about the use of coal and oil is a proper method of trying to promote biased opinions against such articles. Fossil fuel power plants are a fact of life and Wikipedians have every right to create and to contribute NPOV content to technical articles explaining how coal and oil fired power plants are designed and used.

I will be very interested to learn what members of this WikiProject Environment have to say about my above comments. Anlace, please reply at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Environment. - mbeychok 01:58, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I think you are just the sort of person who needs to contribute to the discussion regarding the possible deletion of Category:Health risks that's taking place at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_August_1#Category:Health_risks. The WP:CFD opened on August 1, which means it will probably close in the next day (I will request that it be kept open... ) -- so if you want to participate in this very important discussion, time is of the essence. If you know of anyone else who could contribute to the discussion, please pass this on. Regards, Cgingold 01:52, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You created the article “Colony Collapse Disorder”. Would you be so kind of and give me the idea about the source of: “Queen is evident outside the hive". I want to know more descriptive info about this symptom. Best regards, Andrew S.--131.104.219.177 21:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A while back, you rated the article KFRC (AM) in the WP:SFBA project as "stub class". However, due to a confusing set of moves, history merges and un-merges, I'm not really sure whether the article you originally assessed was KFRC (AM), KFRC, KFRC-FM, or KMVQ-FM, but the article as it stands now is clearly far from a stub. Would you like to reassess the article, and maybe these related articles? You might also be interested in KMPX (FM), a new article which I recently split off from the KFRC-FM article. DHowell 04:04, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done, easily a "start" class now. Cheers. Anlace 15:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Pyadoniijohngame.jpeg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Ghosttown, Oakland, California. Come comment on the dispute. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 00:23, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Turn on your email! So we can communicate. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 18:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC

Your needed there quickly! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk • contribs) 03:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently trying to write a 'wiki' page on Agroecosystem Analysis. I would truely value any input you may have towards the subject. Please feel free to pass on the topic to anyone you know who might have an interest in agroecosystems. I am completely new to this format and am learning as I go. Thanks for your time!

(DYK) section, which presents short blurbs and links to new articles.

		The 50 DYK Medal
		I, Victuallers, hereby award you with The 50 DYK Medal, for your over 50 contributions to the Wikipedia:Did you know? section as featured on the Main Page. Your work is appreciated. Thank you. Yours, Victuallers 11:06, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been revising a bunch of Sonoma County articles that lie within your area of interest, in particular:

• waterways (Americano Creek, Petaluma River, Laguna de Santa Rosa, Russian River (California)) and
• small communities (Cotati, Valley Ford, California, Mark West Creek).

In my efforts to improve the articles, I've done a lot of fact-checking and reorganization. I hope I haven't stepped on your toes. If you have a moment, please check what I've done. Stepheng3 (talk) 02:00, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

You created the noise health effects article, I'm just letting you know that I finished basically re-writing the entire article - there was an enormous amount of original research involved, conclusions which appeared to contradict the sources that accompanied them and a lack of sources for (in my mind) extremely bold statements. I've re-written, please feel free to comment. WLU (talk) 20:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to ask if you are the photographer of this image while the license does not declare "self". Thank you.--Jusjih (talk) 02:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, not the photographer. Anlace (talk) 02:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Upmarket requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, 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 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 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 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. Alan.ca (talk) 15:23, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Dogtown, Oakland, California, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dogtown, Oakland, California. Thank you. Icamepica (talk) 07:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Several years ago you made this edit to Bioswale referencing Willamette River Park. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a reference I can figure out, otherwise I wouldn't bother you. Which park is meant? The one just south of Johns Landing (Willamette Park)? Or maybe one outside Portland, perhaps in Milwaukie (Willamette Riverfront Park)? I'm most familiar with the first one, and it seems the most likely. It was reworked in the mid-1990s for the boat parking drainage, though it doesn't seem like 2000+ linear feet of anything fits. Can you shed any light on this? Thanks, —EncMstr (talk) 18:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anlace, take a good look at my user page. I believe it documents that fact that I have been a long time contributor of good articles related to my many years of engineering experience.

So why have I decided to leave Wikipedia? Because I have grown weary of the revisions made by unexperienced people who think they know a subject when they really don't know it. I am also weary of people who make revisions because they "know better than anyone else". In particular, the actions of one young postgrad student who calls himself Headbomb with whom it is impossible to reason because of his firm belief that he is infallible ... and that he and only he "knows better than anyone else". His attitude has finally been the last straw in making my decision to leave Wikipedia. I am simply tired of trying to reason with the likes of Headbomb.

Goodbye to all the friends I did make here in the past two and a half years or so. mbeychok (talk) 15:21, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading images/media such as Image:Lapalalariverdown.jpg to Wikipedia! As you may know, there is another Wikimedia Foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In future, please upload media there instead (see m:Help:Unified login). That way, all of the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons (you may view images you have previously uploaded by going to your user contributions on the left and choosing the 'image' namespace from the drop down box). Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading!

You haven't uploaded here for a while, though I don't see any account there either. If you ever do upload again, you know where to do it. If you feel like moving some images there, CommonsHelper is your friend. Richard001 (talk) 11:13, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello from WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area!

As part of a recent update to our project main page we are conducting a roll call to check which members are still active and interested in working on bay area related content. If you are still interested in participating, simply move your username from the inactive section of the participant list to the active section. I hope you will find the redesigned project pages helpful, and I wanted to welcome you back to the project. If you want you can take a look at the newly redesigned:

• Main Page
  
• Talk page
  
• Cleanup listing
  
• Template list
  

As well as the existing pages:

• Assessment
  
• Article Worklist
  
• Watchlist
  
• Deletion sorting (California)
  

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page, and add it to your watchlist, if it isn't already.

Again, hi!  -Optigan13 (talk) 07:49, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Schleyerbwe.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -Nard 21:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anlace! About that image: when you uploaded it, you listed it as PD-Author, but also indicated that the author had only given permission for Wikipedia. There is a difference between the two licences: PD-Author means that the image is free to be used by anyone anywhere, not only on Wikipedia. Wikipedia (and Commons) don't accept files that are under a Wikipedia-only licence, which is why the distinction matters. If the image is indeed under a Wikipedia-only licence, it will be deleted, though you could try asking the author to release under a free licence (such as CC-BY-SA, GFDL or Public Domain). If the author has in fact already released it into the public domain, the best thing to do would be to forward any e-mail he sent you about this to OTRS so that a record can be kept. If you need help with this, feel free to ask - I'll probably reply more swiftly if you leave a note on my talk page at Commons. Cheers, Pruneau^talk 09:13, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello from WikiProject California!

As part of a recent update to our project main page we are conducting a roll call to check which members are still active and interested in working on California related content. If you are still interested in participating, simply move your username from the inactive section of the participant list to the active section. I hope you will find the redesigned project pages helpful, and I wanted to welcome you back to the project. If you want you can take a look at the newly redesigned:

• Main Page
  
• Talk page
  
• Cleanup listing
  
• Template list
  

As well as the existing pages:

• Assessment
  
• Article Worklist
  
• Deletion sorting
  

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page, and add it to your watchlist, if it isn't already.

Again, hi! Optigan13 (talk) 00:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Some time ago you did some editing on the population control article... if you are still interested in working on the article you can find sources at [3]. The article could do with some quality contributions. Best --SasiSasi (talk) 19:52, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi--

I saw your interesting comments on the wikipedia “over-illumination” article.

I’m a climate change activist. I’m exploring the idea of a grass-roots, door-to-door campaign focused on illumination. The idea is to go door-to-door evenings, and grab people’s attention by offering to change their porch light to a compact fluorescent bulb that is half as bright (or less ) than the current one. This would have some benefit on its own, but more important, it would be an entre to talking about everything from motion sensors to insulation to converting to a high-efficiency furnace.

To do this, we’d have to be very well prepared (presumably with a written hand-out as well) to explain what is the proper range for illumination on a front porch. It would be nice to be able to measure current illumination, change the bulb, and re-measure to convince people they can live with less light, but I suspect the cost of the instruments would be prohibitive if we do this on any sort of large scale.

A better approach might be simply to carry a tape measure and a chart to hand people that shows lumens for typical incandescent watt bulbs, lux depending on height of the bulb above the porch floor, and the more appropriate lux range, together with the size compact fluorescent bulb that would serve. Our town has a pretty high average education level, so we’d very much want to be able to cite to sources.

Do you have any thoughts about where I might go to start putting together information like this?

Thanks very much.

                 --Werner

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Werner Lohe Brookline, MA USA http://www.climatechangeactionbrookline.org ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

p.s. - I'm a newbie, so if I'm violating some protocol by posting here, forgive me. I've read a bunch of wikipedia help pages, but it's not at all clear to me what I'm supposed to do to send you a message. So I hope this works and please tell me if it's not hte most appropriate way to to this. WLohe (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Ypipria occur map us govt.gif. 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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Peninsula Humane Society, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Unreferenced since July of 2008, also needs change to a more formal tone. Needs a full rewrite to correct.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, 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. Optigan13 (talk) 08:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pacificgiantsalamander2.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Pacificgiantsalamander2.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Pacificgiantsalamander2.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aquaerazorback.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Aquaerazorback.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 13:09, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Canneryerazorback.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Canneryerazorback (1).jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 10:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sonomamtnvineyard.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Sonomamtnvineyard.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 19:11, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:FluorescentT8razorback.jpg is now available as Commons:File:FluorescentT8razorback.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I would like to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change. If interested, please email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 14:53, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Montecitorazorback.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 04:03, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Anlace, I'm just trying to double and triple-check my facts in the article I'm trying to improve. In the article you created, Recovery Plan, there is this sentence: United States Environmental Protection Agency, under authority of the U.S. Congress via the Endangered Species Act, implemented this program beginning in the early 1970s.

This is the first time I've seen a reference to the EPA regarding endangered species recovery plans. Can you point me to the source for this fact? I thought that FWS or NOAA either wrote the plans or contracted out to a third party to write them. Please enlighten this good faith editor-Sincerely, Marcia Wright (talk) 16:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

18 November 2009

Dear Anlace:

Please contact me regarding your image of "mixed oak woodland" at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sonomamtneflank.jpg

Thank you for your time and courtesies.

Paul Forkner Myrna Engler Photo Research, Inc. 5337 N. Socrum Loop Rd, # 322 Lakeland, FL 33809-4256 863/ 815-8890 Phone & Fax mepr@mac.com Paulpof (talk) 14:19, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Anlace, you have uploaded several pictures of the Laguna de Santa Rosa, could you please upload those photographes on commons as well? At the moment i try to translate the english article into german. greetings --Cartinal (talk) 23:52, 16 February 2010 (UTC) P.S. Pardon my english, i'm only german :)[reply]

WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Environment for a Signpost article to be published April 19. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 05:19, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a reminder that the Signpost would like to interview you for an article scheduled to run next week. This is a great opportunity to showcase your contributions and promote WikiProject Environment. Please take a look at the questions and answer as many as you like. Thanks. -Mabeenot (talk) 21:00, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Martinezcm.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 20:00, 22 June 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. — ξ^xplicit 20:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:SHE model processes.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. TheGrappler (talk) 00:33, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Thermale.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 04:32, 27 December 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. Kelly ^hi! 04:32, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Anlace, I hope you're well. My name is Aaron and I'm one of the Storytellers working on the 2011 fundraiser here at the Wikimedia Foundation. For this year's campaign we're seeking out and interviewing active Wikipedians like yourself, in order to produce a broader and more representative range of "personal appeals" to run come November. If you'd like to participate in this project, please email me at amuszalskiwikimedia.org. Interviews are typically conducted by phone or Skype and take between 30-90 minutes. (Note: This invitation is open to any interested Wikipedian — If you're reading this, and would like to be interviewed as well, please contact me.) Thanks! Aaron (WMF) (talk) 04:30, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Cirsiumfontantanalevarfcal.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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, User:Anlace! I notice that you've released several photographs on Wikipedia under a Creative Commons license. Some of these photographs have had permission explicitly registered through the Wikipedia OTRS system (i.e., File:BennettValleylookingsecmhogan.jpg,File:Roundbarnsocounty.jpg, File:Sedimentpondsfoundtaingrovelake.jpg, File:Americanocreekupperreachcmhogan.jpg, File:Sedimentpondsfoundtaingrovelake.jpg, File:Tchaacrmacal.jpg, File:Schaamacal2.jpg, File:Schaamaya.jpg. However, there are others, such as File:Annadelviewofsonomamtn.jpg, that do not have explicit permission. I would like to transwiki the Annadel photo to Commons, and not delete it. Would it be possible to get Hogan's general permission for you to post his photographs on Wikipedia under a CC license? That way, his photographs would not get deleted piecemeal. You could send such a permission to OTRS as done before.

Thanks for your consideration! —hike395 (talk) 17:36, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Archie Carr III 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/Archie Carr III 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 notice from the top of the article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:19, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Aaythanestuarydunes.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 09:31, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

…at the PP NP antioxidant article you have maintained in past. It is fundamentally, and likely irrevocably flawed. Le Prof. 71.239.87.100 (talk) 06:49, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Schleyerteame.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. TLSuda (talk) 15:29, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi, could you please have a look at the image review here?[4] Email correspondence with the photographer is required at OTRS.[5] FunkMonk (talk) 15:20, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Sanbornfieldwredw.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 01:02, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:800px-Eriogonum parvifolium 1cropped.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:16, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Harborsealmmc.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:37, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Rescuemmc.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:38, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Surgerymmc.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:39, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Coquerelsdiningrazorback.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Humphreywhale.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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:41, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Kullabergnorthwestcoast.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:42, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Kullabergmaturetrees.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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:42, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Kullaberglighthouse.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:43, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Malaelephants.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:44, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sanbornsanadreasriftvalley.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:45, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Monboddo House.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:46, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Monboddohousegarden.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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:55, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Overflowepa.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:01, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Beachatnosybe.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:02, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Laurencechurchtomb.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:03, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Indiasewerman.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:19, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Tolbooth 280.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:20, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Jgameaduttonii.jpeg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:22, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hesperolinoncongestumnatlparkservusgov.jpeg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:23, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Snigercloseupmarinco.jpeg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:24, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:S-niger-flormichelemillsphd.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:24, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Middle-ridge-3michelemillsphd.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:25, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Cockscombeastbasin.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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:26, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Komati Gorgelooking upstream.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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:28, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Monkeyrivermangrovemouth.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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:28, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Copanwolflevensoncutterants.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:29, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Americanocrupperreachcows.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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 16:30, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Gilroyhist.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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 06:56, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anlace, thanks for all of your contributions! Back in 2006, you added a paragraph to the Stairs article mentioning "the central pike". Today that paragraph remains little-changed. It offers no explanation of what a central pike is, and the term "pike" is not defined elsewhere in the article. I hope you can clarify how clockwise spirals help defeat ascending attackers. Thank you! Bryan (talk) 17:16, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Goatrockbeach.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Low-res personal photo, there are better photos available at Goat Rock Beach

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Anlace, sorry you are gone (since 2011 apparently). Way back on 21 October 2006‎ you started the helpful, nice article Crow-stepped gable. Thank you! I have started a rename request about it, i wish you could participate. --Doncram (talk) 03:36, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Waterbergbushvelddownsized.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Americanocrlowrreachcmhogan.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 05:21, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Annadelviewofsonomamtn.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — hike395 (talk) 04:48, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Gettlingestandingstone c michaell hogan.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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 00:23, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		Thank you for all your work! --evrik (talk) 15:32, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]