User talk:DavidLevinson

For older talk see

• User talk:DavidLevinson/Vitamins
• User talk:DavidLevinson/Acts
• User talk:DavidLevinson/Timelines
• User talk:DavidLevinson/Long Names

04:29, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

The article mentiones border change that include areas annexed by France between 1790-1792. However, I haven't found anything annexed in that period. Which exactly areas were swapped? Cautious 17:54, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

==Need help editting an article== Hey David I was just wondering if you could help me to edit a certain article because you are an admin. Its not questions about how to edit, its just something that needs an admin. So please respond, btw I don't really get how to view your response to this so if its not just on this page then please post something on my talk page (obeyel) thank you. Obeyel (talk) Hi there. Question about "mid-1800s" on Talk:Victorian Internet, could you take a look? -- Manuel Bondarchuk

---

Hi, could you protect West Wickham as there is much vandalism such as the name Con/Cornelius Mendez being repeatedly added, and also Shivan Sheosunker. These are addded by students of Langley Park school for Boys Brainbox_112

---

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Brainbox 112 (talk • contribs) 20:07, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks for adding List of employer associations and List of labor unions to List of reference tables. I also added List of stock exchanges to it. These are important in the research we are doing for project http://www.consumerium.org/wiki/ . If you have any leads on if there is a list of "national registries" (or something like that) I'm looking for registers of Companies and Associations it'd be greatly appreciated. --Juho 18:04 Mar 16, 2003 (UTC)

---

Archinatural is an orphan. Could you find an article or two to link to it? Manuel Bondarchuk 01:46 Apr 16, 2003 (UTC)

I was just getting it off of the Architecture page (since it didn't belong - probably some theory of some architecture grad student, but I don't think its important enough to link from there (given 0 google hits). Maybe a candidate for deletion? -- Manuel Bondarchuk

---

Hello, I don't really have a comment on an article, but I thought I'd say hello to a fellow Quizbowl person! Adam Bishop 22:17 16 Jun 2003 (UTC)

---

Hello

Would you have any transport input to add to the local food article ? Thanks User:anthere

---

I moved energy crisis back. Rationale at Talk:Energy crisis.

---

Thanks for pulling in USPS info to timeline of postal history! I think some of the entries are too minor to merit a mention in global postal history (otherwise you'll have hundreds of entries listing each country's first "simplified postmark" etc), plus a lot of entries are now unclear as to which country they refer to. Of course, if the US was the first to introduce an innovation, then those entries can stay. Stan 19:07 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Well, the USPS thing was grabbed from the usps history page, and so of course is biased (and tends towards minutia in later years. Feel free to cut what you think is unimportant, though even a minor change in the US is probably more important (affects more people) than when a minor country issues its first stamp. dml

In case you don't Watchlist Talk:Interstate highway, wanted you to have opportunity to consider checking my full edit beginning

Seeking further discussion of Interstates, including Route Nomenclature

The topics of nomenclature for both Interstates & state routes have been idle 14 months on thisTalk:Interstate highway page. Before editing here on the subject, if it has been continued or made a standard elsewhere, can anyone direct me where? ... --Manuel Bondarchuk

---

I'm in progress on a big edit & getting an edit conflict. How big is yours? --Jerzy 00:49, 2003 Oct 26 (UTC)

OK, now i know how to survive an edit conflict, and realize the other guy in one can be done & gone when i'm experienceing it, if i'm slow enuf. I'm happy with what you did, & hope you'll be happy with where i went on from there. [smile] --Jerzy 02:10, 2003 Oct 26 (UTC)

---

Hello. It seems that you are very valuable contributer to wikipedia, but I have not made your acquaintence yet, so I will now say, "Nice to meet you.", --Alexandros 16:36, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)

---

Re 4-H: it seldom ceases to amaze me how many and which articles the 'pedia is lacking, and why no-one seems to think of them for so long. Thanks for that one. - Hephaestos 03:26, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

--- Much thanks for the help on the external links for the Improved Order of Red Men. Now I understand. Manuel Bondarchuk

--- Just wanted to say "hi" to a anyone who cares about the AFSC :-) -- BCorr ¤ Брайен 23:03, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

---

Are you sure that Gary Glitter's R&R2 is the theme to Dr Who? Dr Who pre-dates the song by a decade at least - did the theme music change at some time? I also wouldn't cosider R&R2 to be space rock at all. Bob Palin 05:35, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

search for "Doctorin the Tardis" by the Time Lords, which is a variation on Gary Glitter's song (there have been more than one dr. who theme). Whether it is space rock or glam rock or something else is more subjective (there is no official board of space rock classification), but it is David Bowie like in my mind and he bridged the two. dml

I did search and it says simply that "a rythm" from R&R was used. Gary Glitter practically invented glam rock, in as much as he is like Bowie (and I don't think they are in the same league) it was during Bowie's more showy Ziggy days which are also considered glam rock. There really is no way to consider R&R a space rock tune. I like R&R2 btw, part of my youth.

here is a quote from Wiki on GG "Finally, Leander and Glitter decided that glam rock was the way to go, and began recording "Rock and Roll", a fifteen minute song that eventually became two parts ("Rock and Roll (Part 1)" and "Rock and Roll (Part 2)")."

"Doctorin' the Tardis" is a 1988 remix of the original 1963 Doctor Who theme by Ron Grainer together with Glitter's "Rock and Roll", made by the KLF performing under the name "The Timelords" (see The Timelords for details). It was part of a double A-side single with "What Time is Love". At no time was it the Doctor Who theme music. -- The Anome 16:02, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I am quite certain that watching Doctor Who reruns Saturday nights in the US on PBS in Atlanta c. 1988-89, the opening song was The Timelords version (having checked the MP3). I had always assumed it was older, but I am certain that it was in fact played at the opening of the episode. This may have been a local, US or temporary phenomenon, but somebody remastered at least the Tom Baker episodes for rerelease. Given that Dr. Who is science-fiction-like and involves space travel (as well as spooky Dr. Who sound effects), it is not too much a leap to call The Timelords version space rock. Whether that carries to Glitter, I don't know. dml 15:49, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

having never seen Dr Who in the US I can't comment on that and I haven't seen much Dr Who at all since the 70s, it was however my favourite program growing up, seems a bit dated now. I think that the original theme for Dr Who was certainly one of the earliest pieces of space rock perhaps only predated by the Tornado's Telstar. These are not just space rock/music because of the space connection, they experiment with "space" related sounds. Of course they weren't called that at the time since the genre didn't exist. I bet that the members of Hawkwind (the best space rock by far) grew up as avid Dr Who fans. Good conversation.

---

Air raid shelter

David, how did you manage to remove all those paras from my air raid shelter article without showing your signature, somehow showing my name against the changes? You are saying instead you had reverted to my own page. I never removed my own pages. Please tell me. --Dieter Simon 00:48, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I didn't. I don't have magic database access. Perhaps you inadvertantly reverted the page to the last page I had edited, or some other user did (though I don't know how your name would show up unless there is a bug). See User Contributions, the only thing I did on that day was with the World's Fair. Manuel Bondarchuk 12:47, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC).

Yes David, apologies, I have a feeling the site might have a software problem and might be corrupted. I'll try to find someone to take a look at it and see if that's the case. --Dieter Simon

Can you explain how those pieces of legislation are related to the United States Office of Management and Budget? Kingturtle 02:03, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

some more so than others, I had a list of important legislation, but not so important that it should go on List of United States federal legislation, so I moved it to the seemingly responsible agency. Some day, there will be an article on each of these (as I find time I will do this, but someone else is free to go first), and if you would like to better classify them, that would be great. dml 20:33, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hi David, you might be interested in the debate going on at Wikipedia talk:Browse by category. I am somewhat partial to your cleanup, so you might be interested in following and joining in the discussion. I think there have been some good additions by Kenny sh, since the old http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Template:Wikipediatoc&oldid=2530290, but I think the current design is a little cluttered and the language and choice of terms somewhat idiosyncratic (compare to say, Encyclopedia Britannica). --Lexor|Talk

May be better Thinking instead reasoning in TOC? Kenny 15:22, 2004 Aug 10 (UTC)

I picked reasoning because I wanted something like abstraction, thinking isn't quite the right nuance. Other one word suggestions are welcomedml 21:52, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hi, Its a good idea of yours to have the main Architecture page on architecture(buildings). Its something I thought of doing after I created the disambiguation page. However, I don't know how long it will last that way because the reason I created the disambiguation page in the first instance was because people kept including the newly, and now equally well used, contexts:-). I will list the Architecture (built environment) page for deletion. KRS 18:13, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

un-re-direct-ification: I assume making Talk:Architecture into a redirect to Talk:Architecture (disambiguation) was an accident, and fixed it. If we have 2 independent articles (one is not a redirect to the other), then we need 2 independent talk pages, right? --DavidCary 20:20, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hello, just out of interest, did you realise you might be doing somthing controversial when you included the WB barrier in the category:walls? It's caused quite a controversy... [1] pir 19:32, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that you depopulated Category:Natural sciences except for its title article, and put the articles in Category:Science. What's the reasoning behind this? Thanks —siroχo 23:16, Oct 7, 2004 (UTC)

Category:Science is linked from the front page. The general idea is that users/readers/editors should be able to find categories with the fewest number of clicks. Going from Category:Science to Category:natural sciences to Category:Biology is 50% more effort (and time with sluggish servers) than simply science to biology. dml 23:32, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for adding the image Image:Michael iii.jpg. It currently doesn't have an image copyright tag, and I was hoping that you would add one as untagged images may be deleted eventually. (You can use {{gfdl}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) Thanks! --David Iberri | Talk 19:55, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)

done (public domain) dml 12:35, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I happen to find this my most favourite story, so it's on my watchlist. I saw your edit about the king in see also. Please don't do that again, this could be counted as vandalism! - Ta bu shi da yu 23:48, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Don't insult me by threatening me with calling me a vandal. The king did explode (see the article), the items are related, as is obvious, by the potential change in chemistry/build up of gases in large mammals after death. You don't own the story or the article. The fact is correct (as far as is known), it does not interfere with the flow of the article, and is in fact related. Get over yourself. dml 00:46, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi!

I'm writing to let you know that the Wikimedia Board of Trustees has approved the first stage of the Wikinews project. There's now a fully operational English demo site at demo.wikinews.org. This will be used for experimenting with various review models and basic policies before the site is launched officially in about a week. demo.wikinews.org will become the English version later.

You voted for the Wikinews project, so I'm asking for your participation now. Everything is open, nothing is final. What Wikinews will and can be depends in large part on you. There already is a global Wikinews mailing list for discussing the project. If you are interested at all, please subscribe -- coordination is of key importance. There's also an IRC channel #wikinews on irc.freenode.net. Realtime discussion can help to polish up articles.

If you're looking for something to do, check out the articles in development and articles in review. Or start a new story in the Wikinews workspace, or ignore the proposed review system - it's up to you. I hope you'll join us soon in this exciting experiment.--Eloquence* 01:59, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

Would you mind removing your user page from Category:DavidLevinson? I'm trying to help to clean up Category:Orphaned categories, and your category is one that is turning up. It would be helpful (and in keeping with Wikipedia:User_page#What_should_I_avoid.3F) if you would remove your user page from that category and request that it be deleted. -[[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 15:47, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

done dml 16:49, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...

1. ...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
2. ...all articles...

using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. So far over 90% of people who have responded have done this.

Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}}. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. It's important to know, even if you choose to do anything so I don't keep asking. -- Ram-Man 16:24, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

Should RFC pages be placed on VfD to be deleted? I'm considering removing Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Slrubenstein, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jwrosenzweig and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/John Kenney from WP:VFD. Each of them was listed by CheeseDreams. Your comments on whether I should do this would be appreciated. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:33, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

• Image:Intstate.gif

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 22:04, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

C/D roads are completely different from collector roads and distributor roads. The link to Hierarchy of roads does not belong on Collector/distributor road. --SPUI 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes, they are different. (Though they have similar functions, collecting and distributing traffic from a higher level road). They are part of the hierarchy of roads however, allowing the separation of access and movement functions, enabling freeways to accomplish things that in their absence they could not. dml 03:39, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The only thing a C/D road allows a freeway to do is reduce weaving on its main lanes. It is simply a special type of ramp, and ramps are never included in the road hierarchy. --SPUI 03:45, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It is a parallel roadway that allows the freeway to operate with less interference (and thus higher speed and flow), by shifting access functions away from the roadway. It is more than a ramp (hence the name C/D road in your terms, or C/D lanes as I have seen (e.g. Interstate 270 in Montgomery County, Maryland). dml 03:47, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

In the case of I-270, the outer lanes are simply a freeway/arterial-class road. In the case of more minor C/D roads, they are a type of ramp. A collector road takes traffic between local roads and freeways. Ramps usually connect collectors to freeways, and are extensions of the freeway. The C/D road lies between the freeway and the ramps, and thus has nothing to do with a collector road. --SPUI 03:50, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I made some changes to the hierarchy of roads article, feel free to elaborate. dml 04:05, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Eh, I made some changes, nothing major. I'll leave the link from C/D road, though I still don't really think it should be there, at least the article now discusses them. --SPUI 04:08, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Dave, hi, I have written an article on Vailsburg, Newark. I wanted it to fit into a template so I wrote copies at Vailsburg, Newark, New Jersey; Vailsburg, Newark; and simply Vailsburg. Could you please delete the copies from Vailsburg, Newark, New Jersey; Vailsburg, Newark. I only want Vailsburg to continue to exist.

dinopup

The standard as far as I can tell is that neighborhoods would use the Vailsburg, Newark, New Jersey format (see the other neighborhoods as an example). Are you sure about this? Also the cat should probably just be Category:Newark, New Jersey Neighborhoods since that is in Category:Newark, New Jersey. dml 18:03, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Where did you obtain the figures for Kiwanis membership? The selected anniversaries and Kiwanis International website had report 600,000 members. --Paraphelion 16:29, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[2] Kiwanis data. dml 02:16, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Please observe the style concerning the first major contributor to a page. Maurreen 19:29, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'm interested in some rationale and references pertaining to the changes you made to the Transportation article ( Transportation article diff ) . Cycling as a major form of transport is and has been very popular in China and other countries, has been growing in Denmark and Holland especially, but also in countries like Sweden in recent years, and cities like Stockholm and London. Those countries are among the richest in the world and doing better than most other countries in terms of the Human Development Index (HDI) [3] The underlying causes for the decline in cycling seen in the western world, might well be other than affluency in itself. Perhaps Hollywood and advertising has played a major role. Wikipdia should be Wikipedia:NPOV, but not to the detriment of well argued and well referenced counterpoints to "common sense". I do admit that the contribution of pro-bicycling editor, also lacked somewahat in references though. --Mokgand 22:04, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the section to be more NPOV and better written. The previous version asserted "sustainability" which is at best a nebulous concept. Evidence is people are more or less selfishly rational when choosing the modes they do given their income, their desire to reach preferred ends, etc. That cycling remains a minor mode in most developed countries, and is shrinking in share as most countries get wealthier is a fact. dml 03:40, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ, as I mentioned earlier, citing arguments and examples. Many people who cycle cite the apparrently selfish motivation of better health, and many studies support the notion that cycling might make a difference for health. Odense in Denmark increased cycling by 20% and saved millions in the health sector. I'll gladly give you sources if you want. What sources support your view  ? --Mokgand 22:58, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See e.g. [4], bike mode share in Beijing was significantly higher than any US city (and is declining as wealth increases). Obviously, some select flat European cities have high bike mode shares. We are not arguing whether or not more biking is a good thing, so that it saved millions in the health sector is quite irrelevant. The facts are simply that as countries develop the automobile gains share at the expense of less preferred modes. This is about analysis not advocacy. dml 23:21, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Don't list Wikipedia:Votes for deletion for deletion, especially not if there is no previous discussion on Wikipedia Talk:Votes for deletion! -- Chris 73 Talk 01:45, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Barring unforseen circusmtances, it looks like you're going to win the half-million pool. Congrats. →Raul654 07:02, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Seems that way to me as well. Congratulations. --Alexwcovington (talk) 08:13, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Looks like the unforseen circumstances (database failure) caused you to slip to second place. Sorry. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:58, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi,

re: your club/team certification proposal, I have proposed something very similar in October 2002 [5]. My thinking on peer review has moved on a bit since then; I'm now trying to find a model which maintains uniform standards of quality throughout the project. But I thought you might be interested in reading the discussion thread that developed back then.--Eloquence* 01:56, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)

There is a major debate going on, and I wondered if you might want to chime in. The debate involves how to deal with franchise moves in baseball. The question is whether Montréal Expos should be its own article or if it should redirect to Washington Nationals. All other instances of franchise moves in MLB redirect the old team name to the new team name, and the history of the franchise is covered within the new team name (for MLB, NBA and NFL examples, see here. Some people are confused and think the Expos and the Nats are different teams. Some people don't want to upset Canadian readers.

Indeed, the Washington Nationals are not a new team - the Montreal Expos franchise has moved to Washington, and the old franchise name should redirect to the new franchise name, just like the 20+ instances of this occuring in Wikipedia. For example, Brooklyn Dodger history resides in the Los Angeles Dodgers article. New York Giants history, including the Shot Heard 'Round the World, resides in the San Francisco Giants article.

If you have the time, maybe you could chime in on the conversation there, Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Montréal Expos. Kingturtle 21:05, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi,

I noticed that in June 2002 (!!!) you added the datum that Ibn Nafis discovered the circulatory system in 1242 in the article Timeline of medicine and medical technology. However, this disagrees with the date of 1268 given in circulatory system by a whopping 26 years! I looked online for a source to no avail; do you have a reference for the datum in question? I would like to fix whichever article is in need of fixing, but I can't do it without a reference and unfortunately I can't find one myself. (Internal inconsistencies drive me crazy!) Thanks for your help.

- Bryan is Bantman 23:31, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

The timeline data came from Niel Brandt with permission (see Talk page), I don't know more than that. dml 01:08, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your work on the Los Angeles category. To conform with capitalization standards, Category:Los Angeles neighborhoods, with a small "n", would be preferable. Further, I see that you're assigning L.A. companies to that category, which strikes me as an odd choice. Would somehing like "L.A. businesses" be a better choice? Anyway, thanks for the effort. Cheers, -Willmcw 21:50, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

I note you've protected Category:Science twice now as a result of vandalism. However, both times there was only a single instance of vandalism, which is nowhere near enough to warrant page protection. Also, you didn't put Template:vprotected at the top of the page, you didn't put a note on the category talk: page explaining why you'd protected the page, and you didn't add it to Wikipedia:Protected_page#List_of_protected_pages. You should take a look through Wikipedia:Protection policy, these steps are important for keeping track of protected pages and letting people know what's going on with them. Bryan 07:07, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It is a category linked from the main page, and they are the first thing vandals can get too, hence their high rate of vandalism (see also History, Geography, Personal Life). btw, the Protect this page ought to automatically put on some standard template if it is in fact standard. dml 21:45, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Just wanted to say 'Hi', and make known to you that the article on plastics seems to hold nothing on Polycarbonates. I'm just a dumb double-E working on Drum (Container), but this seems an fairly significant oversight in the article. Since you were involved back near it's genesis, thought you should know. If you don't want to handle the matter, what do you suggest? [[User:Fabartus| fabartus || TalktoMe]] 20:11, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• • Hi, I guess you can take it on if you want. dml 12:34, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi David, I found you on the list of Wikipedians from Minnesota. I've been working on the Norman Borlaug article and we need some GFDL compatible images, are you in the vicinity of the University of Minnesota St Paul Campus? If so would you be able to take a picture of the bust of Borlaug and/or Borlaug Hall, you can see the non-free pic here Image:Borlaug2003.jpg. Many thanks if you can, and thanks anyway if you can't. --nixie 1 July 2005 03:53 (UTC)

Done and done. Jaberwocky6669 July 2, 2005 14:46 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the protocol is, but I responded to your comment to me on my talk page, but since you haven't answered, I thought I'd just note it here too. Feel free to delete this comment after checking out what I wrote.  :) TimNelson 11:21, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I've continued our discussion on the Category_talk:Science page, to make it easier for both of us to follow this via our watchlists. TimNelson 14:24, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I see you merged the mathematics portal and category page. To be honest I'm personally not all that fond about it, but there also are some real problems

• The mathematics portal is under-maintained (I believe the last update was made in April) and the fact that the most prominent mathematics editors don't seem to have noticed the change yet, makes me doubt it will be in the future. Are you willing to help with this?

• You carelessly copied the potal over, destroying the rather carefully crafted one paragraph introduction to mathematics, didn't bother to update the COTW (which currently is Manifold), removed the nice fractal image, and replaced the not so good Major fields of mathematics with the even worse Categories from the portal, and removed several banners.

Cheers, --R.Koot 19:44, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the wording is kind of tough, but I agree with R.Koot's statement. Big changes of this kind be better discussed first at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. Oleg Alexandrov 22:08, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the though wording, being a non-native writer I found it difficult to phrase it more constructivly. --R.Koot 22:34, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All of the other categories linked from the main page were merged with their portal pages. Please feel free to fix whatever you would like, the mathematics category page only refers to the boxes that are on the portal page. Hopefully increasing prominence will decrease undermaintenance. This being wikipedia, we act before we talk. It looks rather nice to me right now dml 11:33, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DavidLevinson. I'm contacting you since you are listed at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Minnesota. I'm going to be at a conference in Minneapolis and am planning a Wikipedia meetup for October 8. If you are near Minneapolis at that time, please see Wikipedia:Meetup/Minneapolis. Angela. 20:55, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately things aren't exactly going as planned. May be a while before I make my way out there! Sorry... Jaberwocky6669 17:38, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there...quick question for ya. You added Category:Cooperatives to the Northern Breweries article. I'm just wondering if it really fits, given that Northern isn't a cooperative anymore. Bearcat 00:06, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you could create Category:Former cooperatives, there are a few others that would belong as well. dml 00:52, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you added Railbox and TTX to Category:Cooperatives... would you think that all the terminal roads (railways in and around a city owned by the major connecting railways in that city, for example Indiana Harbor Belt and union station companies (companies set up to operate large stations such as Chicago Union Station, etc) are also cooperatives? I'm wondering if adding these to that category actually adds information or not. Also, would you say that the Conrail Shared Assets Area is a cooperative? it is owned by the two railroads that use it (it's what remains after Conrail was demerged)... I would say it is not. Just curious as to your thoughts. ++Lar 04:13, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a new category Category:Rail cooperatives would be appropriate? dml 22:50, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about renaming this to Category:Joint rail lines? That term is in use, while "rail cooperatives" seems to not be widely used. We also have an article at joint railway describing the situation. There is also a Category:British joint railway companies that would be a subcategory of it. --SPUI (talk) 13:21, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That takes care of part of it, but what about Railbox and Railgon? dml 13:45, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have personal knowledge that Tappan is now part of Weedeater. I just discovered that the link to the Frigidaire page was dead, and located a new description under the Weedeater page. The corporate description here: Weedeater says that Weedeater is the North American division of Electrolux A.B., formed in 1997 by the consolidation of American Yard Products, Frigidaire, and Poulan/WeedEater. So perhaps it is more accurate to say that Tappan is still a part of Frigidaire, a division of Weedeater owned by Electolux A.B., although the Fridgidaire connection is not explicitly stated on the website. --Blainster 01:29, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the "we" at [6] refers to "Electrolux Home Products" rather than Weedeater. dml 01:31, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

After re-reading it, I agree, and restored the sense of your edit. --Blainster 01:47, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Speedlimit.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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.

Are you the one that deleted the Zagat's page that dealt with the SNL sketch? I wrote that, and there was a discussion going on about its deletion. I decided to merge it with other short-lived SNL sketches, and now I can't even find that original article, so I can copy it to another area. And who deletes a whole article and has the nerve to call it a minor edit? Leadpipevigilante 06:49, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No dml 13:31, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your name on recent changes a few minutes ago, clicked on it, and I read your insightful composition. You might consider sub-paging it and categorizing it into Wikipedia essays for greater visibility. If you still want it on your front user page too, which I'm guessing you probably do, then just put:

<noinclude>[[Category:Wikipedia essays|{{PAGENAME}}]]</noinclude>

on it, and

{{/The Future of Wikipedia}}

on your main page. If you already know how to do this, forgive the apparent condescension... I just think it's something everyone should read. Regards. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 03:57, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dave, Hitler's first name is spelt ADOLF, not ADOLPH. Kelisi 04:40, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

David - I'm having trouble figuring out why this post card is in the public domain. Could you add a line to the image description explaining why? Thanks! -SCEhardT 16:41, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

what do you think of this? -- Zondor 16:18, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"I don't understand what you did by voting against Wikipedia for stable versions, editing the article by adding a misspelled link, and then nominating that different version with the misspelled link. This is never going to work if you fiddle the article and require a new vote each time. I thought you supported your proposal." - i do support the proposal. that misspelled link was not intentionally done by me. something must be wrong with the media wiki software. i meant to only fix the self reference. you dont expect the nomination to be rosy, do you? -- Zondor 16:44, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David, a few days ago you reverted my edit to this page. I did nothing but delete the low-value links per the MoS. Why did you revert my edit? — EagleOne\^Talk 17:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that year links are low value. dml 22:28, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Year links, as a general rule, add very little information to an article. As such, I will continue to remove them wherever I find them (except for full date links). However, I do not want to get into an edit war over this, so I will leave the A&P article alone. — EagleOne\^Talk 21:05, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Schmidt's Blue Ribbon.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stan 04:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The notice was appreciated. Tweaking nearly finished articles is something I rather enjoy here, and the subject is interesting to me. I have already made two suggestions, and am reviewing the rest of the article as much as I am able.

→ P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 18:50, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David. I actually don't edit on that page, i just reverted vandalism. But it seems good to me. Cheers--Ugur Basak 14:50, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your article Distinction without a difference has appeared in the Dead End Pages list because it is not wikified. Please consult the Wikipedia Guide to Layout for more information on how to write a good, wikified article. I would encourage you to revisit your submissions and {{wikify}} them. Thanks and happy editing! James084 19:04, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know - I have ruled that the article United Hardware, although it did seem somewhat spammish, has been rewritten to the point where it no longer does. So it's no longer in danger of being deleted. I've left Death Eater Dan a message to this effect as well. DS 23:47, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You put a cleanup tag on Gold Bond medicated powder with the explination of "family values." Can you explain what that means? Thanks. --Descendall 04:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Read what the article says, paragraph 4 doesn't seem appropriate, even if true. dml 16:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you recently moved an article to Simmons. Why? That is not the name of the business and there was already a redirect for that name. The standard around here is that the article should have the correct name of the business and alternate names are redirects. She we redirect Microsoft to MS? Simmons is a common enough name that a Disambiguate page might be better in the place of Simmons in any case. ---J.Smith 19:31, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use common names is a principle, the full name the previous version The Simmons Manufacturing Co., LLC is quite unwieldy, is it Co. Company, Co, do you include LLC L.L.C, etc. the beginning of the name with "The" is also quite strange. dml 22:25, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was just thinking of the case of AOL being redirected to America Online... but that makes sense I guess since they do business under both names. *shrug* I dunno. The newest name looks great, btw. Oh... thanks for your help on my little project of expanding the coverage of mattress companies! Are you involved in the industry? ---J.Smith 08:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know if you knew about HereToHelp's RfA. I just found myself. hydnjo talk 04:13, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I noticed that you were the original author of Soul City, North Carolina. I live nearby in Winston-Salem (er, sort of near by), and visited recently to take some pictures for an assignment. I spoke with the people at the Green Duke House for a while about their history, trying to take in some things that I could add onto the article here.

I was wondering how you had come across Soul City, and if you had any resources you could suggest to follow up with. It's an interesting story to be told, and I can see some things being added onto the article here. Drop me a line sometime and let me know if you've got any ideas. Thanks. Tijuana Brass 21:03, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I came across it via the HUD New Towns program. (I have an interest in New Towns, having grown up in Columbia, Maryland. I don't have any special sources, but their is a large literature on "New Towns" or "Model Cities". dml 21:16, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, thanks. Tijuana Brass 06:26, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 18:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In case you haven't noticed, GetCITED has been proposed for deletion. NickelShoe (Talk) 16:02, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of shopping malls by state: States: Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts I think you added an extra tilde. :) Just add three to the beginning so you can keep the original timestamp. Cheers. Wikibout-Talk to me! 04:10, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just doesn't look as good and caption is redundant. Such borders are often visual static on many Wikipedia pages. Doubly so here since it spoils the fresh, minty taste of the drop shadow. Pepso 20:55, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks fine, and is standard, but more importantly, it includes the caption which is important for accessibility purposes. dml 02:30, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you'd like to know that List of United States federal legislation has been nominated to be a Featured List. It needs 4 votes by October 2 2006.

As I have labored hard on the article, I would appreciate your looking it over. You can find a discussion here: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of United States federal legislation.

Thank you!

—Markles 23:09, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A meetup of Wikipedians in Minnesota is proposed: please stop by the discussion page if interested. Jonathunder 02:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Meetup October 29, one o'clock, Mall of America. Jonathunder 16:47, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David, I reverted your edit to East Croydon station because the Geolinks you added overlapped existing ones rendering both illegible. Obviously, we can only have one type of title co-ordinates. However, this raises a wider question: which style of co-ordinates should be used? Decimals of degrees, or degrees, minutes, seconds? I personally grew up with the latter, so that is what I've been using on various railway stations etc. But I'm wondering whether there's a policy on which type to use. Do you know? Cheers, A bit iffy 13:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't know about standards, but Wikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinates discusses the issue, it seems there is pluralism wrt to decimal degrees and degree/minute/second. dml 18:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Amara's law, has been listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amara's law. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in whether it should be deleted. Thank you. --Mr Stephen 16:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC) Mr Stephen 16:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:1832cvr100.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:1851cvr100.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:33, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why have you restored this article deleted pursuant to a perfectly acceptable AfD? Am I missing something here? Erechtheus 17:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted your restoration as a clear WP:CSD#G4 — Recreation of deleted material, and posted a deletion review for you. Next time follow the process by yourself. You're an admin, you should know our policies. ~ trialsanderrors 19:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding the article on the Urban League!--futurebird 15:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Fruit logo.gif. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 10:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am an employee of Yankee Publishing, Inc., of Dublin, New Hampshire.

Two months ago, I volunteered to update the Wikipedia listing for The Old Farmer’s Almanac – a publication owned by my employer.

I am contacting you because you have previously edited this listing.

I have endeavored to follow Wikipedia’s guidelines to the best of my knowledge and ability, and would appreciate your input on the RFC I posted today on the Almanac’s discussion page.

Best, NH-Nemesis 21:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, If you really meant to vote"oppose" in the poll Wikipedia:Attribution/Poll, you put your vote in the wrong column! linas 05:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It got moved somehow when their was an edit conflict. dml 10:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:NULlogo.png. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 16:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Aaron'sLogo.gif. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:AFS Utah 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 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 01:41, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The coordinates you added for the above article are incorrect, they are copied from those for Farringdon Station. Can you please fix them? Thanks --DarTar 09:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)--DarTar 09:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed one of your user subpages (User:DavidLevinson/List of distressed shopping malls) had a Miscellaneous pages for deletion template on it. Is the page supposed to be up for deletion? -- kenb215 talk 21:36, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no someone put that there, I don't think they should be deleting user pages, seems improper.

		The Original Barnstar
		To DavidLevinson, on the occasion of Minneapolis, Minnesota reaching featured article. With thanks -Susanlesch 06:48, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:UnitedHardwarelogo.jpg. 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 11:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm working on the Baltimore Crisis, and the history page for it has you as the source of that Chile paid the US $75,000 in gold as the result of the Baltimore Crisis, and I was hoping you could help me with a documentary source for the info, or even better if you could add a foot note for the source to the Baltimore Crisis page, since if it is actually true it makes the thing very much more interesting than I had thought it was. Clearly if we can document it the info belongs in there.John5Russell3Finley John5Russell3Finley 22:13, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I found it myself John5Russell3Finley 05:50, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As one of the earliest editors to the article, your input would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/United States Secretary of Energy‎, Thank you.--Southern Texas 22:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Carper Award, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 21:39, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Gordon Carper, by Closedmouth (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Gordon Carper is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Gordon Carper, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 04:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on N. Gordon Carper, by Closedmouth (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because N. Gordon Carper is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting N. Gordon Carper, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 04:54, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A {{prod}} template has been placed on List of graphic designers, by Heavy1974 (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}.

Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Grim Reaper Bot 06:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David. I just added a suggestion to this category (see Category talk:Garden suburbs). There is currently no category for Garden cities, and I think it would be better to have a single category covering both cities and suburbs rather than try to differentiate between them. What do you think? --RichardVeryard 16:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

---

I noticed some revisions you made to the Input-Output Model article, and I was wondering if you would be willing to give me any feedback on additions I've made to the article Lange Model. Thanks so much! --EMB330 04:37, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello David! I was cleaning up some pages today, due to ImageBacklogBot replacing any fair use image with Image:Example.jpg, and came across an image you'd uploaded, Image:TF-diamond-logo.gif, which used the image in the summary, so it was replaced with the example picture. I removed the example.jpg, but I noticed that the image did not have a {{Non-free use rationale}}, so I went ahead and added one, but no source was given, so it is placed in the Images without source category. I realize it has been over 18 months since you uploaded it, but if you happened to recall where you got the image, could you please add it to the FUR for the source? I'd hate to see that image deleted! Ariel♥Gold 10:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:CumminsEngineLogo.png. 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. — Κaiba 01:49, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:WestinghouseLogo.png. 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. — Κaiba 01:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:YaleLogo.png. 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. — Κaiba 01:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DFA 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) 05:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mrs Butterworth's logo.jpg. 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) 17:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Mrs Paul's logo.jpg. 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) 17:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Biltmore-Atlanta.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:08, 13 January 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MECU≈talk 22:08, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:AG florida logo.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. BJBot (talk) 20:17, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Regislogo.png. 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) 04:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:UnitedHardwarelogo.jpg. 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) 02:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Aglogo.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) 03:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:AFS Amarillo logo.jpg. 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) 04:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:American Tourister logo.png. 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) 04:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[