User talk:Filipvr

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Filipvr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few 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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Yu Ninjie 10:58, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Saints Wikiproject[edit]

This user is a member of the Saints WikiProject.

I also invite you to join the discussion on prayers and infoboxes here: Prayers_are_NPOV.

Thanks! --evrik 18:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Celsa[edit]

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Saint Celsa, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Pastordavid 20:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Campaignbox Dominion War[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:Campaignbox Dominion War requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Roman Emperor[edit]

Template:Roman Emperor has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Bazj (talk) 22:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Val-Dieu Triple Magnum.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Val-Dieu Triple Magnum.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 15:44, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Restored per Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#File:Val-Dieu_Triple_Magnum.jpg. Being a product cover, it still needs a fair use rationale.--Tikiwont (talk) 10:03, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from WP:REFUND. I have been reviewing the situation and here are some remarks:

There only was a boilerplate non-free notice posted on my talk page. Nothing about (lack of notice for) fair use or cover art being at the heart of the problem. TBH that is not very helpful either.
Well at least it links to Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline which mentiones two points, 1) An appropriate copyright tag explaining the basic claim of fair use. and 2) A detailed fair use rationale (FUR)
I see in the history that an actual fair use notice was already added to the page right after it being marked for deletion. Err... somewhat contradictory actions?
The tagger added {{non-free product cover}} which describes the copyright status as possible fair or cover art, maybe to adress the lack of specifics you notice above. What has been missing is the detailed FUR, rationale {{Non-free use rationale}}
A few days after being marked for deletion, a bot tagged it for resize. It was deleted regardless without being resized.
Actullay that was not the deletion reason, rather it should have been resized if kept for which the FUR tag needs to be added.
It is still tagged for being resized now. But according to [Category:Non-free Wikipedia file size reduction request] and User:DASHBot#Tasks it should happen automatically? It didnt seem to have happened over the last few days since the file was restored, though. Indeed, according to [uploads] no resizing has happened since november 24th.
Seems the bot isn't doing that. Needs to be checked.
Before I noticed the FUR on the restored image, I went looking for what to do myself. I got lost in a swamp of copyright templates and rationales. I still wouldn't know what to actually add. In fact, I now know that resizing should happen because the image was tagged that way. But I wouldn't have known without that tag. Or what size it is supposed to be at. (I can only assume now that it is max 400px in any direction because of a notice at the top of the [Category:Non-free Wikipedia file size reduction request] page)

I gather that a clear info like Please fill out {{Non-free use rationale}} as in File:Beers of Stone Brewing Company.jpg would have been more helpful, at least in my own note above.

I dont believe the photograph itself is really worth much discussion over. It's not that awesome. But the above points highlight IMO that at some points, WP processes, guidelines and "documentation" have turned wrong and could use some serious review and redesign - read: simplification. Heck, I am adding all these comments here; but it's likely not the appropriate location either.
Filipvr (talk) 13:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly agree that rules have become complicated here. With respect to the fair use of non free imags, its role in a free encyclopedia has been somewhat controversial, so maybe it is even somewhat more convoluted than usual. I'm not that versed there myself, so I take the opportunity to review a few thinsg and aswere above in detail. I would be great if you stick around to follow-up either with particular topics or helping others. mIght be a useful wiki project becuase many FURS can be fixed easily. --Tikiwont (talk) 09:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Brasserie de l'Abbaye du Val-Dieu[edit]

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

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

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mt king ^(edits) 21:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Brasserie de l'Abbaye du Val-Dieu for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brasserie de l'Abbaye du Val-Dieu 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/Brasserie de l'Abbaye du Val-Dieu 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 good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Mt king ^(edits) 22:38, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Filipvr. 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]