User talk:Grmanners

User talk:Grmanners/Archive1

Thank you for your note. Your query is not easy to answer as it is so general and I have no special knowledge of the Wood Walton Fen. :-)

It is a remnant of relatively natural fen in one of the larger fen embayments. That is, it is part of one of the lobes of fen which extended into the upland. I have never been there but like the nearby Holme Fen, it is wooded. This implies that it is drained and dried out. Holme fen contains the famous Holme Post which indicates just how far the peat has shrunk since the 1850s. However, the map from which I took the woodland information is dated 1974. There has been time for new management to have had its effect. Wood Walton Fen is next to Turf Fen, a name which implies that the natural state of the ecology there was acidic. On the other hand, this picture gives an impression of fen in the strict sense but tending toward fen carr. This impression is reinforced by the insect life. There do seem to be birds and trees as well. Among the latter appears to be a fairly mature conifer, though there is nothing in the photo to say that it is not horizontal. When all is taken together the fen seems to have been managed as a fen with very open woodland, not all of which is coniferous.

This site lists it as being owned by the National Trust but the Trust's handbook does not list it. It would appear therefore to be let entirely into the custody of RSNC, the Royal Society for Nature Conservation. That site describes the habitat thus: reed bed, fen carr, birch and alder woodland and fen pasture. There is a rich flora in mown or grazed fen, ditches and peat cuttings, notable moths, dragonflies, beetles and spiders, Chinese Water Deer. Facilities are: Two hides. Access is to the permitted path, otherwise by permission. It extends to 208 hectares.

Its soil and that of its immediate vicinity is not surprisingly, fen peat (Altcar 2) but it lies in an embayment within the larger one. To its west is the island of Jurassic clay on which Wood Walton castle stood. To the east is the much larger peninsula of Jurassic clay and chalky till, on which Ramsey Abbey was built.

In the Roman Scheme of things, this appears to have been part of the boundary of the Imperial Estate which was not precisely marked by the Car Dyke and similar devices but where the great width of the fen was deemed sufficient to prevent smuggling.

Regards, (RJP)

Hi. Just thought I'd say that I like your new distribution map. :) Mehmet Karatay 19:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found a few journal articles which might interest you. Here are abstracts: one, two, three. If you would like me to send them to you could you please e-mail me your address. They will be photocopies so I will have to post them.

For this one I do not have access to the journal, but even the abstract has enough information to be useful. It mentions that Steenbok that live in the Namib dessert get most of their water needs through eating as they do not have much access to free water. It could be an extra citation for when you mention that fact in your article.

If you don't have access to an academic library but find any other articles you think are interesting I can try to get them for you. Mehmet Karatay 21:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The most suitable book that I know for South Asia (less Himalayas & NE India), with a lot of common butterflies with Sri Lanka is :-

• Kunte, Krushnamegh. (2000) Butterflies of Peninsular India, [India-A Lifescape series] (i to xviii, pp254, Plates 1 to 32) Universities Press (India) Ltd, Hyderabad (reprint 2006). ISBN 81-7371-354-5.

AshLin 12:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, try out this list of bookshops in Colombo. You can phone them & ask. They may be able to get acopy before you reach. Also see this site on Sri Lankan butterflies. Here's a wikilink to compare. AshLin 15:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your note. I'm in England too, Stockport, Cheshire. I've got a few things I'm trying to get on with but I don't seem to find much spare time these days and I'm interested in a lot of things! My big (and it is really, really big!) long term project is putting really comprehensive wikilinked lists of food plants in all Lepidoptera articles and lists of Lepidoptera in the plant articles (some of these obviously are requiring separate list articles). As preparation for this at the moment I'm putting together genus lists for all Lepidoptera families so we don't have loads of orphaned pages (I'm ploughing through Noctuidae at the moment).

If there is anything you think I may be able to help you with, give me a shout. Richard Barlow (talk) 23:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saw your request on Ashlin's talk page. Here is another [1] If there is no article on the authority or one you can't trace let me know.Notafly (talk) 16:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a "standard" or easy-to-use program available for generating distribution maps?—GRM (talk) 20:39, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I usually take a good hardcopy source or (for threatened species) the BirdLife datazone and pick a blank map from Commons and paint away. YMMV but given it's a pixel job I use Paint Shop Pro. If you're a Linux geek, you'll probably want to use The Gimp. I find Photoshop too cumbersome for fine pixel work. I have not yet grokked SVG art; if there is anything bettern than Inkscape (which is a hell to use for complex patterns) I'd be interested to know. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 21:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are doing an Australian range-map might be worth checking-out [2], type in species-name. Aviceda talk 02:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Gimp is also available on Linux, Windows, Mac OS X, and SkyOS. Snowman (talk) 09:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again GRM. What I find works really well once you get used to it is Inkscape. I used that for the Steenbok distribution map. It's free software and available for Linux, Mac and Windows. Despite what Dysmorodrepanis says above I find it's very easy to use and it produces svg graphics which is the preferred format for distribution maps. A lot of the blank maps in commons are in svg as it is so you simply import and colour away as already said. If the blank svg has been created well then you can also select an entire country by clicking on it (this includes any extra territorial islands etc. it may have) and change the colour of the entire country, for an example see this image. I hope this helps. Mehmet Karatay (talk) 22:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As this article has been created with an English Name so it is as per the present TOL guidelines. Since we do not have consensus on this issue of 'common vs scientific names', either way (its been hotly debated in our Project talk pages), I do not favour any changes of names either way - neither common to binomial nomenclature or vice versa. Hence I do not recommend changing it to the scientific name. That does not stop a person creating articles with a scientific name should he so desire to do so, as long as the organism does not have an existing page on WP. Cheers! AshLin (talk) 16:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know how butterfly articles are to be graded, but your page Hamearis lucina is no longer a stub of just a taxobox and a two line lede. I removed the {{butterfly-stub}} template because I wanted to do away with at least part of this 600-page backlog. I also found, to my amusement, that there is no {{Riodinidae-stub}} template in WP (not so much a problem in the UK but a setback for organizing the neotropical butterfly fauna). All best wishes, Bill Overal--Wloveral (talk) 17:16, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm not totally sure but I think "Prose 95% of the way." (Tony, [3]) means another 5% is required. In any case I don't think copyediting will worsen the article, so go ahead when you have time. Thank you in advance. Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 20:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to reviewers it really needs a copy-edit: "The lead is choppy - sentences do not flow from one topic to the next in an elegant or logical manner." and "I copyedited the article a bit as I was reading, but it really needs a good once-over by an uninvolved editor." (Awadewit, [4]). Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 12:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind if larva is changed to caterpillar. I had left it to make it more diverse in vocabulary. Thanks for the copy-edit. Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 20:44, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sending this to all the wikiproject:mammals participants. There's a naming guideline up for discussion on the talk page, and the more people get involved the more valid any consensus drawn. Ironholds 19:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am new to this so assume I am replying correctly? Thank you for the template I will try to use it in future. The UK Butterflies project looks great. Not sure how involved I can get, really I am trying to learn about all things natural in the UK for my work, and am using and updating wikipedia as a useful and rapid resource tool. So much to do, so little time! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blokenearexeter (talk • contribs) 20:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, me again. I was just wondering what you would think about adding a distribution map to the Heath Fritillary page. I personally don't know how to make one and I don't know if you know how to or not. But I think it would be a nice little addition to the page. But I will leave that up to you seeing as your the main person for the page. --IvanTortuga (talk) 17:17, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you by chance know anyone that does know? If not I'll try asking around. --IvanTortuga (talk) 01:34, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah very nice, very nice indeed. If I ever get a program to "paint" I'll totally work on it. --IvanTortuga (talk) 20:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on my talk page. Cheers, Jack (talk) 10:56, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The whole island.For many years we (I am Robert Nash Curator of Entomology Belfast Museum -the we mainly Jim O'Connor same position Dublin)have had the problem of insect lists entitled 1 British Isles which have not included Ireland 2 Britain and Ireland which have not made clear which species are found in Ireland or are Ireland only 3 Britain which have included some Ireland only species.Fauna Europaea managed to separate NI and ROI- a total mess. Ireland is a zoogeographic entity, most biodiversity legislation is being harmonised and of course school children here learn about their "own" fauna (unless they are Chinese,Ethiopian etc) .You might ponder also Leptidea reali not a British butterfly but occurring in Northern Ireland.Note also the Irish subspecies in the RESL lists of British insects.I will reply more fully soon.Very wet and cold here today Brrr Robert aka Notafly (talk) 20:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC) PS You may be amused to learn that under a Unionist adminstration in 1969 My remit was all Ireland but now we are one so to speak I am limited to NI a stance which has powerful republican? support.Good luck with Belgium (Wallomia), Catalonia, Nordamia (North Italy), Macedonia etc. and watch out for the Dublin (almost to a man)Royal Academicians.If you take my advice you will stick to mountains and seas without naming them in any language.[reply]

New lists Latest was K. G. M. Bond, R. Nash and J. P. O’Connor, An Annotated Checklist of the Irish Butterflies and Moths (Lepidoptera)The Irish Biogeographical Society in association with The National Museum of Ireland, Dublin, 2006, 177 pp ISBN 0-9511514-9-5

Next Diptera. Then Hymenoptera. Coleoptera already done.Sell well on the continent since "we" (both of us) are the extreme west of the Palearctic.

Hi GRM, as I have found out you are obviously passionate about British wildlife (UK and GB ;) ), so it'd be great if you thought about helping out at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biota of Great Britain and Ireland. It's a new WikiProject dedicated to improving articles about British and Irish biota. Hope you'll give it a think, it needs some more interested Wikipedians. Cheers, Jack (talk) 14:46, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted it because I could find no other example or reference to it online in an (admittedly cursory) search. Happy to put it back if it's something we can reference... - Philippe 18:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain how this is WP:EL for Sexual slavery? It appears to be a pressure group with no neutral information to add to the topic. I think that it should be removed. forestPIG^(grunt) 18:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know no more than you. I did add his name - just trying "mistakenly" as it happens to link the someone I thought was the guy. I have had the info corrected by Ian from the band itself - so I take it that if Rob "wasn't" a member he would have removed the name entirely rather than fix my edit.!! :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 12:29, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed on User talk:Interiot that you were experiencing the same problems with the edit counter as I was. I've located another edit counter that you may want to try. Best regards --Eustress (talk) 03:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings!

I see you're busy upgrading this article—great! Let me know when you're done and I'll give it a review.

Cheers—GRM (talk) 15:22, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's kind of you to notice and offer, I would appreciate a review very much; I'll let you know when I have things to my 'respectable' standard! MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 15:55, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well I don't think I could ever be quite finished, but for now I can't think of anything to add, so please feel free to review it. Would be much appreciated, so that when I return to it I can make improvements. Thanks in advance. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 19:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, your Master-ship!

I have read through the page and am quite impressed. I made a few editorial tweaks and may go back some time to do some more. I raised a number of issues on the Talk page for your consideration.

Interestingly enough, the Leps wikiproject does not officially use category "C" for quality, but I'm not sure the article is up to "B" yet...

Hope this helps and "good luck" with future peer review. —GRM (talk) 19:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I've briefly checked out the edits, but am just about to do the same for the talk page. I'll probably reply there if that's okay, to avoid cluttering your talk page more, so I'd check back shortly. I didn't realise Leps didn't use "C" for quality, and I would agree, probably not ready for "B" quite yet (although I have seen worse Bs!). Still, I'll make the article my centre of attention for a bit and see how far that gets us. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 19:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GRM,

Nice species, first saw mine in Udhampur, J&K in 1981. Point noted, will keep an eye out for references to it. I am temporarily on a wikibreak (extended) to Kanha National Park. Since my blog was neglected awhile, I'll be back on WP after some time.

Actually, I got fed up that no one seemed to be working on the topic of Lepidoptera morphology so I set up a page and decided to bring it up to at least A class or GA. Its still incomplete, but better than nothing. Requires at least another 500 edits. In the meanwhile got entangled at Lepidoptera migration too. You could consider a few edits on those too!

Nice to know you are still active,

Regards, AshLin (talk) 19:55, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I was wondering if I could persuade you to chip in and help me get rid of the red links in the great moths of Great Britain lists you created some time ago. I've come a long way (I'm mostly working on Noctuidae species, there's only a few to do on that list), but there's still some work to be done and all help would be appreciated. I've made similar lists for Noctuidae in Israel, Canada, the Netherlands and some other countries by the way, although it seems that it is hard to find info on species outside of Europe and North America. Cheers! Ruigeroeland (talk) 16:03, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! Good luck with your work! Cheers. Ruigeroeland (talk) 22:08, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Anyway: splitting would be an option for sure, but there are so many families I chose to lump them together, but if you feel splitting would be better, please do so. I am not 100% sure all families are still valid though, so someone has to do some research on that. I know for a fact that the pages on macromoths you made are not all up-to-date anymore because a lot of those families are now subfamilies (i.e. the Arctidae and Nolidae are now considered subfamilies of Noctuidae). It isn't that big of a deal though, because people can find the species they are looking for. Anyway, I requested information from Fauna Europaea, and if they are willing to provide this, I will be able to make country lists like yours for all countries of Europe! Cheers Ruigeroeland (talk) 16:06, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, They have an export function on their site. You get all info in an excell doc, making it quite easy to make a country list. I requested lists including the subfamilies, which they do not provide on their site, so I will be able to make the list the same way you did, so I am hoping they will be willing to provide those. If not, it will indeed be a lot of work, since then I will have to do it one subfamily at a time.. :) Ruigeroeland (talk) 18:54, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's this one: http://pubservices.nrc-cnrc.ca/rp-ps/absres.jsp?jcode=ent&ftl=n06-012&lang=eng It seems accepted nowadays, at least, a lot of taxonomic papers I came across recently classify Arctidae as Arctinae, etc.. Fauna Europaea also demoted the Arctidae and Nolidae, and that seems to be a pretty authorative source. Ruigeroeland (talk) 18:37, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, that seems more than reasonable. Thanks for letting me know, now I can take into account that the revision is not accepted by everyone! Ruigeroeland (talk) 18:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good afternoon GRM. You need to talk to Maurice Hughes and/or Brian Nelson.Send me an e-mail - [email protected] - for more info.I am happy to comment on the latest studies but can't give you new data.all the best from the Emerald Isle Notafly (talk) 14:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is your justification for moving Inachis io to Aglais io? Most of the references including the Commons and Wikispecies use Inachis io. Dger (talk) 01:47, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Lepidoptera for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 05:12, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Science lovers wanted!

Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 02:05, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Grmanners! I would like to respond to a suggestion you made in the Wikipedia Signpost WikiProject Lepidoptera report (Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-04-16/WikiProject report) where you state "Maybe someone should tell me to get on and upload my images of African Lepidoptera!". I am currently making articles on African butterflies and have covered about 80% by now. A lot of them do not have images. Could I ask you to upload them in the near future? It would be a great addition to the articles I made..! On a related note: I also made country lists for all Afrotropical countries, see: User:Ruigeroeland/Sandbox3 for a complete list of available country lists. Cheers! Ruigeroeland (talk) 14:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the swift response. I dont have a preference for certain species, although I am still working on Lycaenidae and Hesperiidae. All African species from the other families should have an article by now. All images of species with an ID would be welcome I guess. I am not familiar with dropbox, but now would be a good time to learn.. :) I dont know the amount of images you have available and the amount of work it would be to upload them to commons? I would be willing to help, but I'm not sure if I am allowed to upload your images? (commons is quite strict with checking the copyright status and since I did not make the images, they might not trust me if I claim they are released under a suitable licence). If you would like to contact me off-wiki you can use my wiki-mail adress. Cheers! Ruigeroeland (talk) 16:33, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"In UK English, we do not "lump" turtles, terrapins and tortoises as they do in US English: hence, "land turtle" is "tortoise"; we use "terrapin" (no idea what US English uses!); and "sea turtles" are simply "turtles" in UK."

Do you have a modern reliable source (post 2000 and not a rehash of older content) for the above? As a Brit myself the experience is that people don't use terrapin but sometimes use tortoise if they are from the George of Blue Peter era (1980s), or if they are younger use turtle because of Ninja turtle and later Squirtle from Pokémon. I've only once heard the term terrapin used and that was by an Irish lady. Basically, Brits don't have any native turtles, terrapins or tortoises so all they know is from the TV. Regards, Sun Creator^(talk) 23:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, User:Chiswick Chap and I will be working on Lizard for GA sometime soon. Would you like to join? We could use someone with experience in reptiles. LittleJerry (talk) 16:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I generally find that subspecies clutter the page and are unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donkey8 (talk • contribs) 15:58, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Steenbok-distribution.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, superseded by File:Steenbok distribution.svg.

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. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 08:03, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Climate Hazards group Infrared Precipitation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022169420307447. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:19, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This was always understood and I have been meaning to get back to it.

Would have been nice to have had a chance to rework before it was deleted. Message today; page gone today = a tad unreasonable IMO GRM (talk) 17:35, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Grmanners, if this wasn't a case of a copyright violation, I'd restore this article to Draft space for you to work on improving it but these copyright issues are a bright line that admins and editors can't cross. I encourage you to recreate this article with only new content. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:09, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I came here from Onel's talk page. The comments above are correct - copyright violations are deleted on sight. You may not host copyright violations here for any period of time - there is no provision of a grace period while you fix them up, we delete them as soon as they are brought to our attention. In other words: uploading copyrighted material to WIKIPEDIA and then complaining about it's deletion = a tad unreasonable, IMO. If you want to copy/paste from sources, do it offline, and only upload here once you have completely reworked the text. Also be aware of WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASING: it's not sufficient just to change a few words here and there, the text needs to be entirely your own. Girth Summit _(blether) 09:25, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Steenbok-distribution.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 01:50, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]