User talk:E James Bowman/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, E James Bowman, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Mishae (talk) 04:11, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Raymond Renshaw & Frances Elizabeth Scandrett.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Raymond Renshaw & Frances Elizabeth Scandrett.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 04:14, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked the person that removed the image from the article to explain why they believe Scandrett Regional Park had an "excessive non-free files". I've asked you too. In Wikipedia:Non-free content Policy 3.a. says "Minimal usage. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information." There is no more that one photo per person mentioned in the article. No photo exists with all the people in the photos. So there is no one item that can convey equivalent significant info. So I'm going to add the photo back to Scandrett Regional Park as you've suggested. E James Bowman (talk)

Orphaned non-free image File:Scandrett Homestead 1940s.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Scandrett Homestead 1940s.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 04:14, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked the person that removed the image from the article to explain why they believe Scandrett Regional Park had an "excessive non-free files". I've asked you too. In Wikipedia:Non-free content Policy 3.a. says "Minimal usage. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information." There is one photo of the building mentioned in the article. And the photo of the building does not contain the people mentioned in the article. So there is no one item that can convey equivalent significant info. So I'm going to add the photo back to Scandrett Regional Park as you've suggested. E James Bowman (talk)

Orphaned non-free image File:Thomas Henry & Lucy Susie Scandrett.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Thomas Henry & Lucy Susie Scandrett.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 04:16, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked the person that removed the image from the article to explain why they believe Scandrett Regional Park had an "excessive non-free files". I've asked you too. In Wikipedia:Non-free content Policy 3.a. says "Minimal usage. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information." There is no more that one photo per person mentioned in the article. No photo exists with all the people in the photos. So there is no one item that can convey equivalent significant info. So I'm going to add the photo back to Scandrett Regional Park as you've suggested. E James Bowman (talk)

Orphaned non-free image File:George Scandrett.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:George Scandrett.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 04:20, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked the person that removed the image from the article to explain why they believe Scandrett Regional Park had an "excessive non-free files". I've asked you too. In Wikipedia:Non-free content Policy 3.a. says "Minimal usage. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information." There is no more that one photo per person mentioned in the article. No photo exists with all the people in the photos. So there is no one item that can convey equivalent significant info. So I'm going to add the photo back to Scandrett Regional Park as you've suggested. E James Bowman (talk)

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:45, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Park[edit]

Please note that that article is about the Scandrett Regional Park. It is not about multiple generations of people who used to own the land the Park is now located on. We definitely do not list all of their names, their years of life, the companies they ran, their children, etc. All of that is perfectly appropriate for a historical site (like on the location or on the Park's own website), but it does not appear to be relevant to the Park itself. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:12, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The history of the farm, buildings and family is one of the major reasons the park was established and is what helps make the park unique, as you can read in the referenced material. Other Wikipedia articles about historically significant New Zealand places explain the "names, their years of life, the companies they ran, their children, etc". Eg Linwood House, The Colonial Cottage Museum, Pah Homestead. The history is of significant local interest. Eg [Article A][Article B][Article C] E James Bowman (talk)

Well...we could include some more, but we can't include POV phrases, which your version had quite a lot of. In addition to being neutral, remember that we want to be an encyclopedia article, not the equivalent of the park's website. Let's try to discuss the details on the article's talk page; maybe I was being too strict and there is a legitimate compromise. But since we've got a third editor, it makes more sense for all of us to engage there. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:29, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Qwyrxian. I was about to post on the article's talk page when I noticed another editor had jumped in and completely decimated the article; deleting more referenced information, making it factually incorrect, non-sensical in parts and threatening to remove more. So I'm going to leave everyone to it for now.

I see that another editor has now joined and has re-added some historical info; the great thing about the new addition is that it is based on information from the New Zealand Herald, which is a source independent of the park, and thus more helpful for us. I hope this helps improve things from your perspective, and you're still welcome to comment further on the talk page. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:42, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scandrett Regional Park[edit]

Hello, E James Bowman. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Scandrett Regional Park, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 10:49, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wereith, thanks for the welcome. I told you earlier today here: User talk:Werieth that I had reviewed Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (which covers what you've posted here) and Wikipedia:Verifiability and I concluded you are unjustified in mass deleting my article. I explained that most of the information you deleted in the article was referenced third party historic information, with some information published by my family and provided to the Auckland Regional Authority in 2008. And that the article had been sent to, and reviewed by Michelle Edge, David Edge and Sue Hill of the Auckland Council. They have expressed no concern in any of the content I created, and have assisted me by providing further publicly published material that has now been incorporated into the article. I also told you that I reviewed Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and that I don't believe you've followed the normal protocol here: "When you find a passage in an article that is biased or inaccurate, improve it if you can instead of just deleting it. For example, if an article appears biased, add balancing material or tweak the wording. Be sure to include citations for any material you add, or it may be removed. If you do not know how to fix a problem, post a note on the talk page asking for help. To help other editors understand the reasoning behind your edits, always explain your changes in the edit summary. If an edit is too complex to explain in the edit summary, or if the change is potentially contentious, add a section to the talk page that explains your rationale. Be prepared to justify your changes to other editors on the talk page." Based on that I undid your mass deletion of my article. I have since had further, more constructive input into the article and made two rounds of edits. Firstly removing information provided by my family that hadn't been re-published by the Auckland Council, and re-referenced that information to the Auckland Council. I also removed the listed info about the park (from the Auckland Council Website) that was considered inappropriate. I verified information in the article with a New Zealand Herald article on the park when I learned media was considered an appropriate Wikipedia source. Finally, I removed more third party, referenced information that wasn't considered appropriate to Wikipedia, although I had reviewed and provided examples of Wikipedia articles that set a precedence for the type of information contained in the article: Linwood House, Pah Homestead, The Colonial Cottage Museum. I have reviewed the links you have provided above, and can assure you that no personal bias exists in the content I have provided and edited. The article is not autobiographical. All the information is from independent, referenced sources. As some of those sources are complimentary about the Park and the Scandrett family, so I'll now do an edit pass to ensure neutral point of view. I welcome you improving any passage in the article that you believe is biased or inaccurate or not neutral. But, please stop breaking normal protocol and just deleting it. E James Bowman (talk)

The content you are adding is not appropriate, you where already told this. Do not re-add it. Werieth (talk) 12:13, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please read it as it now stands and explain anything you believe is "not appropriate". E James Bowman (talk)

You have already violated WP:3RR and should be blocked, I am not going to file a request, if you stop re-adding it and actually try to discuss the issues. Right now you are displaying Ownership of the article which isn't allowed. Werieth (talk) 12:17, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The material you are adding does not belong in an article about the park. If the individuals are notable that should go into their own article, otherwise it should be left on the website for the park. Werieth (talk) 12:19, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could we all stop reverting and actually discuss this on the article talk page, please? E James Bowmen, Werieth is technically right--if you revert again, you should be blocked for violating, WP:3RR, a bright line rule on edit warring. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:51, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Helena Scandrett.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Helena Scandrett.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 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. Werieth (talk) 20:08, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Werieth, as you twice deleted this image (and the other four above) from Scandrett Regional Park and you and others have not yet consented to using the five images in that article, nor creating a biographical article, I'll have to let them be deleted as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. E James Bowman (talk)

BTW, I've added more source material to: Talk:Scandrett Regional Park to support the case to set up biographical article(s), the main one coming from here: [[1]], a PDF from the National Historic Heritage Workshop 2004 run by Department of Conservation (New Zealand), New Zealand Historic Places Trust and Institution of Professional Engineers New Zealand. It contains links to two PDFs of the presentation [[2]] and paper [[3]] presented by Dave Pearson [[4]], Conservation Architect, Auckland. E James Bowman (talk)

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:56, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of William Henry Skinner for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William Henry Skinner 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/William Henry Skinner 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. Schwede 66 01:45, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know Schwede. E James Bowman (talk) 21:06, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2017[edit]

Your addition to William Henry Skinner has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:38, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa. The page states it has the following License: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 New Zealand Licence meaning it is out of copyright. --E James Bowman (talk) 08:18, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the mistake. I have made some amendments to your citation so it's clearer and added attribution for the compatibly licensed material. It's okay to copy from compatibly licensed or public domain material, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this legal requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:01, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa. Thank you for doing that, and for the info.--E James Bowman (talk) 07:04, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:St Paul's Symonds St GOD w US.jpeg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:St Paul's Symonds St GOD w US.jpeg. 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) 18:47, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:The Christmas Story by SPANK St Paul's Arts & Kids.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Christmas Story by SPANK St Paul's Arts & Kids.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) 18:51, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:St Paul's Auckland Logo.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:St Paul's Auckland Logo.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) 18:09, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:St Paul's Symonds St Alt Carols Volume One.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:St Paul's Symonds St Alt Carols Volume One.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) 18:10, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:St Paul's Symonds St GOD w US.jpeg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:St Paul's Symonds St GOD w US.jpeg. 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) 18:11, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:The Christmas Story by SPANK St Paul's Arts & Kids.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Christmas Story by SPANK St Paul's Arts & Kids.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) 18:12, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:St Paul's Auckland Logo.svg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:St Paul's Stories Book.jpg[edit]

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 17:20, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:St Paul's Singers Harvest of Joy.jpg[edit]

The file File:St Paul's Singers Harvest of Joy.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While non-free album cover art is generally allowed to be uploaded per item 1 of WP:NFCI when it's used for primary identification purposes in the main infobox or at the top of a stand-alone article about the album in question, it's non-free use in other articles or in other ways generally requires a much stronger justification per WP:NFC#cite_note-3. This particular album cover is being used in a decorative manner in St Paul's Church, Auckland#Gallery which is not allowed per WP:NFG and it's also not itself the subject of any sourced critical commentary anywhere in the article to provide the context for non-free use required by WP:NFCC#8.

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) 07:34, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following four files have also been proposed for deletion for the same or a similiar reason: File:St Paul's Symonds St GOD w US.jpeg, File:St Paul's Symonds St Alt Carols Volume One.jpg, File:St Paul's Stories Book.jpg, and File:The Christmas Story by SPANK St Paul's Arts & Kids.jpg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:36, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:St Paul's Auckland Logo.svg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:St Paul's Auckland Logo.svg. 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) 02:40, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, E James Bowman. 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]