User talk:Bungle/Archive1

Kayleigh Crowe/Gibbs

Her name in the programme (as characters had referred to her as) was Crowe, as was her name on the website. The credits were erroneous. Trampikey ^{(talk to me)(contribs)} 22:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Your CSD nomination on article Holy Family Catholic High School

Myself, being the creator of the article, would like to comment on your decision to nominate it for CSD. I have created many education/school related articles, and had you checked my contribution history, would see that it isn't a vanity article, nor an attempt as trying to make it notable. There are many stubs out there for different topics, most of which are accepted as articles which can grow in time. I don't agree with your decision to nominate it for CSD and assume you never really checked my contribution history. Bungle44 15:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, seeing as how the page is gone now someone on the admin side must have agreed with me. And btw, creating multiple useless pages does not change the fact that they are still useless pages. 150.113.7.99 19:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Sega PU

No problem, the article probably can be speedied. I have, however, already created an entry on AFD, so I don't know if the AFD template should remain. Koweja 17:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Td disk.png

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

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 10:06, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Teradrive_rear.jpg listed for deletion

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Teradrive_rear.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, a non-profit website, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it, but use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. J Di ^talk 18:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject Emmerdale

I feel you may be interested in this. We only have two members Peterwill 17:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

RE: Template:Emmerdale

I think it takes up too much room to have their full names on it, so I changed it. If you'd like to raise the issues of the change, please raise it on the talk page of the template. Thanks -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Chris_chittell.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Chris_chittell.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nilfanion (talk) 20:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

RE: Maybe you just don't see what I see?

I know that it depends on the computer as to how the pictures look. The first plane crash picture does look good on on the left. But, with the Kings River it looks too conjested unless the pictures are reduced, which shouldn't happen. The way the main storylines of emmerdale is now, looks good. Jameshdl 10.19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Emmerdale Changes

I hadn't noticed that there was an Assessment Scale for Emmerdale articles, I have been tagging pages but have also created the pages for the categories so for example we now have pages such as Category:Stub-Class Emmerdale articles which allow us to see all of the stub class entries for example. Do you think it is much easier to see the position if we have a separate assessment scale page? I will contine to tag articles for now, and can then always use these category pages to update the assessment scale in one big update once I am finished. The only issue I see with this is keeping it up to date when people who are not working with the project change the assessment whereas the category pages will automatically update themselves. --Amxitsa 15:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

RE: Emmerdale minor characters

I have noticed your disagreement with a couple of merger proposals on some of the soap's characters. I think the idea of the consolidated article was to list characters that appear on a recrurring basis too, not just those who aren't as important as the rest. I agree with you that several characters aren't really classified as "minor", but certainly would be classed as "recurring", and hence for that also don't support their claims for own articles.

Maybe a separate, but similar article by the lines of List of recurring Emmerdale characters might be a potential consideration? Bungle44 14:11, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

If an article called List of recurring Emmerdale characters was created than that should just replace List of minor Emmerdale characters. As all the characters on the "minor" are really recurring and with the title "recurring" it also doesn't diminish the importance of any of the characters put in it whereas an article entitled "minor" implies that the characters don't have an influence on the show and for the most of them that's not the case. Jameshdl 14:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Eighth Gen. Discussion

I understand that it should be a communal discussion. the workings of wikipedia aren't that complex. i left the message on the admin's page because he is the one with the power over when the article can be unlocked. if you want to help with the article and participate in the discussion, the article is currently located on my user page since it isn't ready to be posted as an actual article. please feel free to make any changes you feel are necessary. J.L.Main 21:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Good work Sir

Thanks for adding the references to Britains got talent. Been checking to see if they have been added since the citation tag was added and decided today to remove them as nobody had added any and as soon as I do....lol --The internet is serious business 16:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Who Killed Tom King?

I was hoping you could take a look at the above article. Since you said on the WikiProject page you are interested in bringing articles to encyclopedic standard, this one is one with a problem. The above article had 40K+ of plot summary that I cut out, but probably it could use a little more than is there now. Any chance you could give it some attention? Thanks. Mangojuice^talk 13:22, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

RE: Tom King plot summary

Rather than create a new section, I'll amend the above. It seems evident that you wish to keep the article in its current state whilst others wish for some review of it's state. May I first thank you for not readding every picture (i.e: not directly reverting my change), although the ones you put back I feel are equally less-important as the ones you agreed need not be retained. Simply a picture of someone's facial expression (Len, for instance), can be summed up in a few words, which takes up less space and will load the page that little but more quicker. The same with Jamie's face - it doesn't add any more to the reader, who not forgetting is whom the article is supposed to be aimed at. Pictures of the actual events (ie: fights/punchups) have a purpose as to give an idea to what the atmosphere was like, but we really need to cut out the ones which wont be missed. Even after my edit I think there were too many pictures. I'd appreciate if you review the other pictures, or at least acknowledge mt stance. Cheers. Bungle44 10:39, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll agree that the deletion of the Jamie and Len photo's is grand. Out of all the other photos I'd say Jamie giving his statement can be removed, but not deleted as that's the character's picture on his page. Jameshdl 11:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Raising of school leaving age

The article Raising of school leaving age you nominated as a good article has failed , see Talk:Raising of school leaving age for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a review. LordHarris 00:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the message. Firstly in regards to the image, because it is only a graph, it could quite easily be reproduced, this might invalidate the fair use tag (which is required for a GA article). Therefore I recommend either making the graphs anew yourself, if you can or failing that go to Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve and see if someone can reproduce the graphs for you. If someone at image labs says the graphs cant be reproduced easily or theres no need then the image would qualify as fair use. However for the moment I suggest you copy and past the following fair use rationales to the current graphs, which are the most appropriate if it is a UK government work:

• {{CrownCopyright}}
• {{Non-free fair use in}}

Secondly once you have finished splitting the school leaving age articles into two and edited them to GA spec then please nominate the article again. If you send me a message I would be happy to do the GA review again and pass it if all is well. Regards, LordHarris 19:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

underscore

thanks; This is something AWB is doing automatically in its attempt to get rid of underscores in article names, etc. AWB goes too far, however. Hmains 17:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

screenshot on Talk:Hospital Tycoon

Hi: with respect to the Hospital Tycoon article, I'm confused: PhotoCatBot added "screenshot=yes" to the {{cvgproj}} template, flagging the article as needing a screenshot, not as already having one. I'll be happy to fix the bot, but please clarify what it should do here. Tim Pierce 22:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

No worries -- the image request tags on Wikipedia are waaay too complicated. :-) Tim Pierce 22:43, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

UK school age

Thanks again for finding/fixing this underscore error. AWB does this to eliminate underscores in article and paragraph names, but goes too far and does this in other places too. I did not notice this instance resulting in this error. Hmains 22:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Amstradmegapc logo.jpg

Image Copyright problem

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Amstradmegapc logo.jpg. 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, 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, 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: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. 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 18:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 18:52, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

3RR

Hello. Please note that you are in danger of violating the 3-revert-rule on the America's Got Talent article. Please try to discuss changes before reverting them, and please remain civil at all times. Thanks. --_{Boricuaeddie is now} Agüeybaná 01:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the mistake. Thank you for your extremely civil reply :-) Happy editing! --_{Boricuaeddie is now} Agüeybaná 21:31, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Frank Parsons

Frank Parsons is a complete article. whicky1978 ^talk 02:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:AmstradMegaPC Advert.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:AmstradMegaPC Advert.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BeggarPrince.jpg)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 18:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Building Schools for the Future

Hi, placing references is not covered by the MoS - instead see: Wikipedia:Citing sources#Where to place ref tags. Personally I prefer the "Nature" style that is mentioned there, as opposed to the US style which was chosen by one American body in the 80s, as this keeps items within the same clause or section of the sentence, and helps readability, IMHO. The BFS article had a mixture of styles, and I had actually tidied it up for consistency before you changed it around again. I was just about to update the article with more info on the primary school programme, but I'll wait 'til you've seen this before proceeding, to avoid any more edit conflicts. Regards Ephebi (talk) 11:57, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for your understanding, though if its any consolation, reference style problems have happened with other articles. Like anyone else, I'd prefer to get things right first time, but there always seems to be a need for a final polish after every major edit, particularly with footnotes, so thanks for that! I'll try & expand the Primary school bit now. Rgds, Ephebi (talk) 13:41, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Coronation Street template

Hi. I just had a small question regarding the template for the Coronation Street Characters. Now I am a bit new here and am not sure of the extent of the "Articles for Deletion" controversy, but I am a bit confused with the importance of a new character in the show. If they don't talk about contracts, how do we know how important they are? I would suggest that Lauren and the Masons at least be put in the template as they were brought in as major characters and will be getting big storylines in the New Year, but the others I can see your point. (Still, why are a lot of the ones that were erased still in the top list on the page?) I am also a bit confused, with regards to the processes of the Eastenders Character page where they add a lot of the people in the major list right away. 69.28.232.224 (talk) 23:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC)samusek2

Thanks for the message. What I was referring to was the template at the bottom of the page, not the actual list. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Coronation_Street) The last name on that list I believe is Carla and she arrived last Christmas. I was curious as no characters who joined the show this year are in that list.I wondered if in that list of characters section on the bottom, we should add Lauren and the Masons as out of all the characters introduced this year, they seem to be the ones who were brought on with long term plans. British soap magazines are a bit different than soap mags in the States, where they usually say in the news section. "This actor has signed a contract. or "this character is recurring." 69.28.232.224 (talk) 04:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC) samusek2

Coronation street idea

Hi Bungle, I notice you are quite active in editing Coronation Street articles. Currently I have got drawn into the AFD for Roy Cropper. I'm attempting to do a major rewrite, sourcing it and adding lots of real world info to save it from deletion. I think I can get the article into quite good shape, however Corrie character articles in general need a lot of sorting out, and I think that Roy will be just the start of these AFDs if something isnt done. Sadly, Wikipedia is no longer allowing fiction articles with only unsourced plot summary.

I think I remember you saying somewhere that you were interested in sorting the character articles out. Do you think it would be a good idea to make a Corrie wikiproject, similar to EastEnders and Emmerdale? I think it may be a good way to get corrie editors working together to improve these pages, and hopefully save them from mass deletions. Let me know what you think :) Gungadin♦ 00:16, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

That's great, i'm glad you're interested and I agree with what you're saying. Wikiprojects can be very productive, I know we have got a lot done at the EE one because we were able to discuss things and come up with ideas. The EE one did benefit from having several fairly dedicated members, but the number of active contributers has dwindled somewhat recently, and there is really only two people running the project now. I suspect Corrie articles, like EE, have a lot of contributing editors who dont concern themselves with wiki policy. But the good thing about the wikiproject is that you can vote and build a consensus for all things regarding Coronation Street more easily, and it's much easier if there are certain rules or guidelines in place that you can direct new users to. We could start the project and see how it takes off. Hopefully it will be successful, but if it dies like the Emmerdale one, perhaps we can propose a merge of all UK soap projects? Even if certain members never edit pages from certain soaps, it will still be advantageous to have differing opinions and more people contributing to the decision making.Gungadin♦ 14:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeh, i'll look into getting it started now :) Gungadin♦ 15:29, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok ive started it off Wikipedia:WikiProject Coronation Street. Feel free to change or add anything you like. The project page still needs a lot of work. It may take a bit of time to build up to how we want it, but at least it's started :) Gungadin♦ 16:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

P.S the bright green might need changing. I was trying to be adventurous :)Gungadin♦ 16:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I dont recall the EE project doing anything to promote except talk page banners. But Some projects make invites, and if there are some regular corrie editors you know of, then perhaps they can just be contacted directly to let them know that it's there.Gungadin♦ 14:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Your copyedit request

On 17 August 2007, you made a request to the League of Copyeditors for a copyedit on Raising of school leaving age in the UK. Because of a heavy backlog and a shortage of copyeditors, we have been unable to act on your request in a timely manner, for which we aplogize. Since your request, this article has been subject to significant editing and may no longer be a good candidate for copyediting by the League. If you still wish the League to copyedit this article, please review this article against our new criteria and follow the instructions on the Requests page. This will include your request in our new system, where it should receive more prompt attention. Finetooth (talk) 18:41, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Liz McDonald OR Liz Tomlin

Over on the Liz Tomlin page, someone raised the point that since Liz chose to keep her surname and not take Vernon’s, the page should still be titled, Liz McDonald. If you agree should we go ahead and rename the page? Thanks! — SpikeToronto (talk) 07:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Please see the TalkPage of the User who unilaterally changed the name from Tomlin to McDonald. — SpikeToronto (talk) 21:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:EiC Logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:EiC Logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Image deletion

I haven't requested an image deletion... in fact I don't think I ever have. It must have been someone else, apologies. Perhaps the editor who did did not check the upload date or something. SGGH ^speak! 20:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:AmstradMegaPC.png

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:AmstradMegaPC.png. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 19:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

proposal to merge WP:PROF into WP:BIO

There is an ongoing discussion of a proposal to merge WP:PROF into WP:BIO at Wikipedia talk: Notability (academics). Since you have commented in AfD discussions for articles about academics, you may want to participate in the discussion of this merge proposal. Regards, Nsk92 (talk) 12:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

School leaving age.

Hi, why have you added a map legend underneath the map, when there is clearly a legend on the map? --Bsrboy 19:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, i'll leave it be.--Bsrboy 20:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsrboy (talk • contribs)