User talk:Crypticfirefly

Welcome to the Wikipedia

Here are some links I thought useful:

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. Wikipedia:About, Wikipedia:Help desk, and Wikipedia:Village pump are also a place to go for answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.

Be Bold!

Sam_Spade (talk · contribs) 21:09, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

images of letters

hi Crypticfirefly -- I appreciate your images of runes and gothic letters, they look very nice; you should, however, insert them into article text via templates (such as, say {{ahsa}}, or {{gothic a}}, and ideally announce their existence at Talk:Runic alphabet and Talk:Gothic alphabet so people know they exist), so that they may be easily replaced with unicode glyphs in the future. Regards, User:Dbachmann (logged out) 21:42, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Popiel

Thanks for your help with expending the article about Prince Popiel.

Norum

M. Mustafaoğlu

The extra bio information I placed on the page was actually from Mr. Mustafaoğlu himself. Expatkiwi 17:29, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

VERY nice work on Wiki so far. Thanks so much! But how come you still have that ugly red link for your username? Could you please share at least some insights into your world/personality on your user page? ;) Renata3 04:50, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rainbow mythology

Hi Cryptic... Thanks for your comments; I think you've helped me clear this in my own mind. You're exactly right -- the phrase 'Rainbow mythology' seems to imply that there is a mythology OF rainbows. Obviously rainbows have been an important element in every culture's mythology and symbology, but there's not a unified 'theory' or 'explanation' of that factin either science or myth. (that I know of). In fact, creating one is what I think would be 'original research' about the article. I have nothing against rainbows, btw, expecially bridging ones, as a lovely symbol of the budding global Anthaskarana. That certain rainbow images have been nearly completely co-opted by a particular 'interest group' in the US is kind of a drag (no pun intended ;), but such is life.

Btw, I agree w/ Renata3's comments -- many experience 'pedians pass over comments from 'red users', on the theory that, if they don't know or care enough about Wiki to create a user page, why bother with them. Don't think either is the case for you. :) Eaglizard 12:58, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Chicken on a raft

One of the things that I love about Wikipedia is that you can write a completely new article and, within a few miutes, someone will improve it. Having started up a Young Tradition article, I was delighted to see you have corrected my mistake in the title of Cyril Tawney's song. Keep up the good work! Bluewave 21:52, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image galleries

You have in the past commented on Image Galleries nominated for deletion. Most galleries are nominated because the nominators feels that galleries violate WP:NOT. The William-Adolphe Bouguereau gallery has been nominated for deletion (here). A proposal to modify WP:NOT is here. Please join either or both conversations and comment as you see fit. Dsmdgold 16:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Rebecca J. Nelson" VfD

In response to your suggestion that I change my vote in the light of the additional info you've unearthed: you're absolutely right. Done. Thanks, Hillel 05:57, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rooney

I never saw the AfD, I made an editorial decision to redirect a stub contiaing no actual information to a related article. With increased scrutiny on bios of living people, unverified two line stubs aren't helping anyone. Also being the sick wife of a Governor is not especially notable, the details are better in his article unless she has actually done something to make her meet WP:BIO.--nixie 07:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/G-Men(Slang)

Could you please revisit and reconsider based on my comment on the AFD discussion page? - Mgm|^(talk) 11:46, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus

Good question. Usually if there's no overwhelming support for either side I will list as no consensus to delete. If one or the other is a clear winner then I'll list that as the vote. In reviewing the AfD I would have probably should have put keep, but the end result is the same. Ifnord 20:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

You seem to have published a comment, meant for another user about an AFD, on the Esperanza talk page. What has probably happened is that you accidently clicked on the green e in the user's signiature. As a result, the message has probably not reached the intended user, and you should try again. Sorry about that. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 16:48, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

truck

Your "Fuck truck" image is hilarious. It should have a loudspeaker playing porn-funk, and it should drive around residential neighborhoods like an ice-cream truck. --Allen 03:12, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On Kahomovailahi

On Kahomovailahi, see my comment at Talk:Kahomovailahi Bucketsofg 06:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hell's Kitchen People Search: Heather

Hi, Crypticfirefly. I noticed you were trying to find the last names of the Hell's Kitchen contestants. It seems like Fox is purposefully trying to hide them for some reason. I've started trying to find them myself, starting with Heather. It's bloody frustrating. So far, I've found out that she's gay, graduated from the Culinary Institute of America and worked at the Paragon, in Seattle. But no bloody last name! Aaargh!

I'll keep looking. Ex-Nintendo Employee 08:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Ranhofer, and thank you!

Thank you so much for turning Charles Ranhofer from red to blue! I kept meaning to do it, but never got up the nerve. The more I learned about him, the more intimidated I got about starting the article, so I never did. I've been away from Wikipedia for almost a year now, but I'm encouraged to come back seeing things like your contributions. Bless you. Mothperson cocoon 18:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: USMC film list

You have commented on the AFD discussion for List of films featuring United States Marines, the discussion can be viewed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of films featuring United States Marines.

Following support for my suggestion, I have done a userspace rewrite of the article at User:Saberwyn/Films featuring the United States Marine Corps, with the rewritten article in the top half and the current article with annotations as to their inclusion or non-inclusion in the rewritten list.

I would like to request that you review the rewritten article, and if you think it is appropriate, amend your stance at the AFD discussion. -- saberwyn 11:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: List of films with disabled protagonists

Thank you for pointing this out. I have amended my comment. I had, I am embarrassed to say, missed that part of the title and read it as List of films with disabled ''persons''. -- Black Falcon 05:25, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your pointing this out as well. Please see my further comments on the AFD page to clarify my concern about the issue. Arkyan 15:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good public library

Yes, there are a few ones supporting research, such as NYPL. But for a more typical good library like SF, it limits the subjects a little, especially in science. For a period when I lost my remote connection to my university, there were articles I simply didn't try to work on. You mentioned you have the soul of a librarian, and part of the job is in fact learning how to get the most out of inadequate sources. But in a really good open stacks library like Berkeley or Columbia or Princeton,... (I mention places I know) Despite digitization, without that there are still subjects that cannot be done adequately. (& Im a librarian in body as well as soul, & if you want to talk, feel free to email me from my page). DGG 19:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ziryab garden.gif

Hello, Can you plz chick this picture Image:Ziryab garden.gif , I've found it in wikimedia [1] and it is not for Ziryab's garden ,it is actually for the Arabic tale of Rayad and Bayad , therefore I deleted it from Ziryab Article. can you plz do some changes on it. --Aziz1005 18:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bounding Main picture

Hey... I apologize if I'm not communicating using the proper medium. I'm new to being a Wikipedia author.

You asked about the Bounding Main pictures I uploaded. The reason I could upload them in good faith is that I'm a member of the group - I know which images can be freely distributed. Basically, since we made those pictures ourselves, I'm comfortable sharing them.

I'll ask the rest of the gang how to deal with our (literally) thousands of pictures that we've got in our gallery [2].

In the meantime, thanks so much for the interest!

Jon Krivitzky 05:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vocalists are musicians, too

Hey, no flame intended-- but I noticed an edit comment you made. A vocalist's instrument is themself, and they are very much musicians. Of course, trimming extra words from the article is good for focus, but just wanted to pick that one nit. Thanks for all your good efforts and voluminous work. Be well, __Just plain Bill 13:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Wicca

I've put back references. Seems daft that someone edited out references then put article for deletion because of lack of references!

AfD nomination of Shinmeiaishinkai

Shinmeiaishinkai, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Shinmeiaishinkai satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has 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/Shinmeiaishinkai and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Shinmeiaishinkai 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. fuzzy510 21:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archive of Image Deletion notices

While I was away from Wikipedia for a time, the policy regarding images, particularly "fair use" images was changed and a number of bots posted image removal notice messages here. Rather than leave them to clutter this page, they have been moved to User talk:Crypticfirefly/image message archive.

Creme de violette

Great job on adding a photo -- do you own this bottle and how does this stuff taste? Badagnani (talk) 04:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I bought it this afternoon, but haven't opened it yet. Crypticfirefly (talk) 04:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Involution ocean 1977.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Involution ocean 1977.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. the skomorokh 16:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments welcome

Thank you for your comment about me sticking to my gun as far as my image goes. I have since re-upped it two more time. The second time it was deleted before I even had it upload and the comments edited. The third time it was nominated for speedy deletion however I contested it and did a detailed reason as to why. That was ignored and it was just deleted. You might want to read my talk page now to see the various reasons being given for it's deletion. Soundvisions1 (talk) 04:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for sticking up for me with regard to my images such as Image:Holtage.jpg. Doug Anthony said privately that the encyclopedia article on him should have the picture of himself from his days in government, "not a photo of elderly retirement". Paul Austin (talk) 10:41, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you deleted following this discussion. Just curious, did you agree that the image was non-encyclopedic after looking at it in the Johnny Apollo (toy) article? (I think I may nominate the existing image in that article because it so awful.) Or was the fair use rationale that I remember adding inadequate in some way? Thanks. Crypticfirefly (talk) 06:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was mostly concerned about copyright. The fair use rationale you added wasn't sufficent in accordance with WP:NFURG; I can restore the image if you're going to add a better one. Stifle (talk) 12:52, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Acorn van.jpg

I deleted the image because it was an orphan. -Nv8200p talk 00:29, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Derivatives

Further to our conversationon one of the image deletion discussions and on my talk page, here are some links to documents which discuss the derivative issue on images:

Guideline:

Wikipedia:Image#Obtaining_images - "All images on Wikipedia must comply with the image use policy. This means that they must be compatible with the conditions of the GNU Free Documentation License. In particular, images must be free for commercial use and alteration."

Policy:

Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Adding_images - "Images which are listed as for non-commercial use only, by permission, or which restrict derivatives are unsuitable for Wikipedia and will be deleted on sight, unless they are used under fair use."

Discussion:

Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags#Guidelines - "For an image to be considered "free" under Wikipedia's Image use policy, the license must permit both commercial reuse and derivative works."

Commons Policy

Commons:Derivative_work#What_is_a_derivative_work.3F

Hope this is what you are looking for and would love to see what you determine from your reivew. Thanks.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:50, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:The man with a rhyme.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:The man with a rhyme.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 05:00, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh, yet another example of destruction rather than creation. (This album cover had been on the article page for the artist for over three years under fair use (the actual legal concept) and then someone decided to remove it and orphan it. Such a nice welcome back when I'd been away for a while. Crypticfirefly (talk) 05:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Crypticfirefly. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 February 8.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

NJGW (talk) 09:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that this is a fair-use image. The caption you added unfortunately amounts to OR; that is to say we have no idea what the authors of the magazine were actually thinking. I'm worried that to actually discuss the cover itself (which is what would be needed for the image to remain under the fair use rational) would require similar OR. I'm not completely sure what the public perception was at the time. The original author of this wiki-article however was miss-characterizing the situation, and I think the image could be misleading to today's readers. Can you give me your impression on reading through the article, whether expansion on this theme is needed? NJGW (talk) 15:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:Ziryab garden.gif

File:Ziryab garden.gif is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Jardin de Ziryab.gif. 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:Jardin de Ziryab.gif]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Crypticfirefly. You have new messages at Drilnoth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

–Drilnoth (T • C • L) 14:20, 4 May 2009 (UTC) I'm not exactly sure how to do this but I hope I'm writing to Crypticfirefly. Who are you, and how does this thing work? You deleted info from Bob Zentz's wiki page a couple of days ago that I posted more than a year ago. I am Bob's fiancee and I write and manage his web site -- not exactly sure how I can violate copyright by posting something I wrote myself. I posted the information at his direction; Wiki can confirm this by writing to him at zentzfolk@aol.com. Everything on the page is documented -- if you believe something is an overextended claim, please let us know, but please don't delete all of his info without knowing the facts! I need to re-post the information asap -- he's on tour and many people go to Wiki to get info about him -- but now I'm afraid you or someone else might blackball me for doing so. We also have a new picture to post of him, and I also need to update the bio to reflect what's currently on his site. The photographer has given permission and we will credit him and add his link. Are you affiliated with Wiki, or did you just do this on your own? Really concerned and upset about this -- I can't watch the page all the time to see if someone has done something to it. Thanks. Jeannemcd (talk) 09:32, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bounding main at chicago maritime festival 2009.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bounding main at chicago maritime festival 2009.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. FASTILY ^(TALK) 23:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Michael Saso

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

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

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

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion invite

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard#List of the biggest selling R&B/Hip Hop albums of all time in the United States. Viriditas (talk) 09:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}})[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Forebitter (band)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Forebitter (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Touch Of Light (talk) 04:21, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at Forebitter (band)

Hi Crypticfirefly, you recently removed a deletion tag from Forebitter (band). Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove speedy deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the tag. Although the deletion proposal may be incorrect, removing the tag is not the correct way for you to contest the deletion, even if you are more experienced than the nominator. Instead, please use the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. Remember to be patient, there is no harm in waiting for another experienced user to review the deletion and judge what the right course of action is. As you are involved, and therefore potentially biased, you should refrain from doing this yourself. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 04:26, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Forebitter (band)

I have asked for a ruling on whether Proquest is a valid reliable source at WP:RSN. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 04:28, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's because you didn't actually read the reference before you deleted it. Crypticfirefly (talk) 06:12, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully a helpful hint.

I noticed the CSD and subsequent savior of Forebitter. You asked on Touch of Light's talk page why they would CSD it only minutes after creation. Some editors, including me, patrol newly created pages. It isn't efficient for us to make lists of these pages and check on them later to see if they'll meet notability guidelines. New pages that fail to meet notability guidelines are therefor tagged immediately. We expect all new pages to meet these guidelines before they are placed in article space. My suggestion is that "work in progress" pages be created in a user sandbox and only moved to the article space when they are ready for prime time. This will avoid the unpleasantness of having the article tagged, and then assessed, when it is still in an early state. Thanks for your work on this article! Sperril (talk) 20:03, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We expect all new pages to meet these guidelines before they are placed in article space. - My thoughts exactly Touch Of Light (talk) 00:58, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As do I. I believe the article was fine even in its original one-sentence form. Please read the below. We also all expect people reading new pages to actually apply the guidelines before tagging them. As for "checking on a list later" that's not my point. If the article had been tagged minutes after creation, that would have been one thing. It was seconds, and that tells me that you didn't think about it. I'm sure you usually do, and I'm sure you are a very fine editor, but I think you can understand why that would annoy someone. And the problem was compounded by someone else who immediately deleted the reference.Crypticfirefly (talk) 07:03, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of the Forebitter article, notability was *clearly* stated in the original iteration, and there was a clear citation to a reliable source. I could have legitimately stopped right there and left it as a one-sentence stub. The person who chose to tag it either did not recognize the source or does not understand the notability guidelines for musical groups that are not in the pop music genre. I do sometimes use the user sandbox method when I'm going to be working on something over a long period of time, but I think it is a time-wasting unnecessary step when I'm doing something quick. I trust in my fellow editors to see what I'm doing-- which is why the first thing I did was establish notability and include a cite. Nevertheless, while patrolling new pages is a good thing to do, I strongly believe that tagging seconds after an article is created is simply rude. People may have a slip of the finger when previewing, there are any number of reasons why something might look odd for the first few minutes it exists. But it wasn't even a few minutes, it was a few *seconds*. Touch of Light tagged the article so quickly after it was created, I suspect he/she thinks he/she is playing a video game rather than editing. I probably wouldn't have been so annoyed if another person who also thinks he/she is playing a videogame hadn't decided a few seconds later to delete the (full bibliographic) citation because he/she didn't understand that the link included in that citation was to the online database from which the journal article was obtained, not the journal article itself. My guess is that Touch of Light made the same mistake, concluded that the claim of notability was no good, and hit the trigger. But that's just a guess. I think it is rude, and I think both of them need to slow down and think about what they are doing. Perhaps you will head over to Touch of Light's page and make that suggestion yourself. Crypticfirefly (talk) 20:30, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - Just to clarify, when you make a new page just make sure to slap a "work in progress" tag next time, so I can make sure it is still in the process of being worked on. Sorry if my tag came off as "rude" but I was not familiar with the band itself, and saw the page where you still had no mention of it's importance, so I marked it. Sorry If you were going to add to it later, thats why you are given a period of time to contest it! In the future - slap the tag, and I will move on to the next article. Cheers! Touch Of Light (talk) 00:57, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And to add, when Touch of Light tagged the article, they weren't saying "This article must be deleted right now!" The tag means that the article is a "candidate" for speedy deletion. What we expect is that an admin or another editor who is more familiar with the notability guidelines for that particular type of article will make a decision. If it meets the notability guidelines, you can rest assured that it won't be deleted. And even if it was deleted, you could have created the article again immediately with whatever changes you wanted to ensure it wasn't speedied again. You seem to be assuming that the tag is more adversarial than it is intended to be. Touch of Light was simply asking someone to take a look. Someone did and decided that it met the notability guidelines. Hence, no deletion. The process worked as it was designed to. Sperril (talk) 04:16, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sperril, "Candidate for Speedy Deletion" means "I think this so obviously doesn't belong here that there's no need to discuss it." Touch of Light, it came across as rude because you obviously didn't read and evaluate before you tagged: there was a statement of notability in the very first sentence posted. Based on the speed at which you apparently tagged it, it was a snap judgment of the sort that should be reserved for pages consisting solely of obscene ASCII art and things of that nature. It was also vexing because your tag was ambiguous, I couldn't tell if you found the statement of notability inadequate, or the reliability of the reference insufficient. I still don't know. (Ambiguity admittedly exacerbated by the person who chose to then delete the reference mere seconds after you applied your tag.) Those are two different problems that would have to be addressed in different ways. In the future, (1) read more carefully and (2) don't "slap" tags on things the second they appear. Suggestion #1 will help you with #2. Clearer documentation of why you think an article should be a candidate for speedy deletion would also be much more useful than what you did in this case. And remember that there is another person on the other side who is, just like you, trying to improve Wikipedia. I hope this is helpful to you. Crypticfirefly (talk) 07:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hugill photo

Thanks for helping with the fair use rationale. I went to go do it, but found you already had. Thanks again! DrBaldhead (talk) 11:23, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Old Dutch.gif needs authorship information

Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:Old Dutch.gif appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).

If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: {{subst:usernameexpand|Crypticfirefly}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
or use the {{own}} template.

If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:File page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lutterloh

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Lutterloh requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. TowTrucker (talk) 05:33, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lutterloh for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lutterloh 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/Lutterloh until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. TowTrucker (talk) 05:35, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Kraken-Up-CD-Cover-Bounding-Main.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" 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. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded the Bounding_Main#Discography section, so that this image is no longer orphaned, and so that the previous content of the Kraken Up album page is restored. I foresee that the other album pages (Maiden Voyage, Lost at Sea, Going Overboard, and Operation Share the Shanties) will eventually be eliminated, and their content moved to this section in a similar manner. I did Maiden Voyage as an example. What do you think? (I've also improved the band's page in order to remove the Notability clean-up tag, and I'll work on the other clean-up topics next.) Johnson487682 (talk) 19:39, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Joe Filisko, Crypticfirefly!

Wikipedia editor Ana Bykova just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for making a wiki page, it looks great. Best wishes, Anastasia Bykova (talk) 01:50, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

To reply, leave a comment on Ana Bykova's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Seals

You asked about seals in Maine. My parents saw them in Acadia National Park on Cadillac Island. They do not recall the exact time of year, b ut I suspect it was late summer. I am sure the rangers can advise if you call ahead. μηδείς (talk) 00:21, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information!Crypticfirefly (talk) 02:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James Conway (musician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Columbia College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

Hello! Do you remember where you got this: File:Cactus piece.jpg?? Did you scanned it yourself? Please add a source or let me know on my Commons talk page. Thanks! --Hedwig in Washington ^(TALK) 23:56, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Order of the British Empire

Category:Order of the British Empire, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bjerrebæk (talk) 18:10, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

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

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

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

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Crypticfirefly. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Crypticfirefly. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Crypticfirefly. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Kraken-Up-CD-Cover-Bounding-Main.jpg

The file File:Kraken-Up-CD-Cover-Bounding-Main.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-free CD cover art being used in Bounding Main#Discography which is not really allowed per WP:NFLISTS, WP:NFTABLES and WP:NFC#cite_note-3 because the context for non-free use required by WP:NFCC#8 is lacking.

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. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:28, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Kraken-Up-CD-Cover-Bounding-Main.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kraken-Up-CD-Cover-Bounding-Main.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:38, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Jolly Rogers for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Jolly Rogers 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/The Jolly Rogers until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:58, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Catharine-waugh-mcculloch.jpg

The file File:Catharine-waugh-mcculloch.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) 01:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Philharmonic Dining Rooms

I'm impressed by your edit, here, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Philharmonic Dining Rooms. You seem to have anticipated the Phil's Grade I listing by fourteen years! KJP1 (talk) 08:12, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At the time I was referring to some reference that was included in the article.Crypticfirefly (talk)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:17, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Steve Dawson (American musician)

Hello, Crypticfirefly

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Joseywales1961, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Steve Dawson (American musician), for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. To prevent the deletion, please add a reference to the article. You may remove the deletion tag yourself once the article has at least one reliable source.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Joseywales1961}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

JW 1961^Talk 22:10, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for auto message, I know you only made a re-direct, will notify the guy that expanded that re-direct. JW 1961^Talk 22:12, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Crypticfirefly/John Lennon Songwriting Contest

User:Crypticfirefly/John Lennon Songwriting Contest, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Crypticfirefly/John Lennon Songwriting Contest and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Crypticfirefly/John Lennon Songwriting Contest during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been around a lot. That was a draft article, had I realized that it would be subject to deletion if I didn't do something with it overtly I'd have moved it elsewhere. Did the rule on draft articles change when I wasn't looking? Admittedly it is months later so I can't really say much about it now, but it is a little irritating. So it goes. Crypticfirefly (talk) 02:06, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Tom Lewis (songwriter)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Tom Lewis (songwriter) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Lavalizard101 (talk) 11:52, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]