User talk:Jorfer

• /Archive 1
• /Archive 2
• /Archive 3

Hi. I would like to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change. If interested, please get in touch via my talkpage or email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 17:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment at Talk:Zo (people)#Proposed merger Zo/Zou. Unfortunately, Khumpita is not a current contributor, so we will have to work without any of his additional insights. The anthropological literature may be useful in merging the articles. What do you think of calling them Zomi? Ideas, suggestions? --Bejnar (talk) 21:03, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just to let you know, I started a discussion here regarding your re-additions to Template:TBSW. Cheers, timsdad ^(talk) 00:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was very disappointed to see that you removed my (previously anonymous) edit regarding the relation between cap and trade and taxes. Your comment that they are only equivalent in theory, not in practice, is false; there always exists an emissions fee that would have the same economic effects, though in the presence of uncertainty, it may not be the fee you had anticipated. For an introductory sentence, I thought that that would be too complex. I get this, not only from the cited textbook itself, but also personal communications with its author, Harvey Rosen, who used this subtle but very important fact in practice while serving as the Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers in 2005.

I meant that addition to be apolitical; from an economics standpoint, it's simply one of the most fundamental things to realize about a cap and trade system.

I am putting together a longer section, detailing the proof of why this is true, as well as a discussion of how uncertainty affects things. I was shocked to see this not already on the page.

Achilles1212 (talk) 01:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but see, that's the crux of the issue. You imply that we need to cap at a certain value for all of time. In fact, the appropriate cap changes just as much as the price of the permit does (or the appropriate value of a tax). The appropriate cap (and the appropriate tax value) is determined by when the marginal cost to society of reducing output by one more unit of pollution outweighs the marginal benefit of society of that reduction. This can be represented as the intersection of the marginal cost and marginal benefits curves. Anything that changes these curves (such as a deterioration in economic confidence) changes both the appropriate price (or tax) and the appropriate cap. Thus, to do a proper job and make sure that you maximize the net benefits to society, one would have to constantly adjust the cap in a cap and trade or the tax in an emissions fee system. I'll discuss this in much more detail with graphs and equations in my section.

Achilles1212 (talk) 16:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell me how anything I've said is normative. I don't believe that a cap-and-trade system or a tax system is better. They are each appropriate for different issues. It's all determined by the shapes of the marginal costs and marginal benefits curve. You are correct in saying that Congress could never implement a changing marginal tax rate. Neither could they implement a changing cap. Unfortunately, the appropriate value (tax or cap) will change, so one has to pick the system that will keep emission levels closer to the new societal optimum. This is where uncertainty comes in and you have to give your best guess. Sometimes the optimum quantity of reduction will vary a lot, while the optimum price of reduction will not; here it's better to guess the price to society and implement a tax. Other times, the price will vary a lot while the optimum quantity stays fairly fixed; here it is better to guess the desired quantity and set a cap. So while a cap-and-trade system could be appropriate for carbon, a tax system may be appropriate for sulfur (I don't know which is better for which; people spend their lives doing just these calculations). This is a completely positive statement; one or the other will get you closer to the optimal situation.

That said, at any one moment in time, there is a definite price to buying a permit to produce one unit of pollution in a cap-and-trade system. If, at the moment, one were to replace the cap-and-trade system with a tax per unit equal to the price of a permit, then absolutely nothing would change. All companies would still clean up the same amount. As time goes forward in the two scenarios, things would be different as conditions change. Nevertheless, there always exists a cap that would have the same effect as a given tax at a single moment in time, and there always exists a tax that would have the same effect as a cap. In a cap-and-trade system, the tax value changes all the time. In a tax system, the cap changes all the time.

Achilles1212 (talk) 22:10, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:IG#Image_galleries. Please reply here if you're going to. - Denimadept (talk) 00:15, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well then keep the historical photos, add some more from User:Jorfer/Sandbox3, and call it history in pictures or something like that. There is no reason to remove the gallery altogether.--Jorfer (talk) 00:37, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They're all historical. Everything is historical. I only removed the gallery, not the pictures integrated with the article. - Denimadept (talk) 09:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I mean those that capture a one-time event in the bridges history. Not all the valuable historical images can fit within the article.--Jorfer (talk) 14:07, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I still think the gallery should go. It's just a random bunch of pictures. People can get that from the Commons link. - Denimadept (talk) 15:38, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know who is doing it? Why were you singled out for this? - Denimadept (talk) 23:32, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded on my talk page and commented on the article talk page. -- Donald Albury 10:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That new photo that was there on your profile yesterday was very appropriate. I understand you didn't like it much, but Wikipedia is not about your likings. Wiki userpages are meant to reveal the editor to the world, so that photo was very proper. I request you to revert it back in true Wiki Spirit. Antihijacker (talk) 13:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your edits to metric expansion of space, you cannot simply remove a formatting to a important piece of information especially if it is potentially controversial. All information in these entries must be formatted and presented properly H:E. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Antihijacker (talk) 13:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked Antihijacker for harassment, and asked for a review here. -- Donald Albury 17:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...by User talk:Denimadept#The answer to your question. - Denimadept (talk) 20:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I still think this study is not important and relevant enough to be included the the WP:LEAD and have removed it.Scientus (talk) 23:05, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the bug report. It should now be fixed. That particular links module has caused problems in the past and I have been meaning to rewrite it. Now I have a good reason to rewrite it. Thanks again. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 05:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Cost-shifting, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. UltraMagnus (talk) 20:04, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Cost-shifting, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cost-shifting. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. UltraMagnus (talk) 08:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Jorfer. Please note that Democratic Presidential Nominee is not an office & therefore doesn't belong in the articles Infobox. None of the Presidential & Vice Presidential biography articles has these in their Infoboxes. Please don't re-add it. GoodDay (talk) 22:08, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another reason: Can you imagine 'how long' the Infoboxes would be at Franklin D. Roosevelt & Richard Nixon, if one added the 5 times the've been on the Democratic & Republican tickets respectively? GoodDay (talk) 22:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Sorry for my slightly loud 'edit summary' at the Carter article. GoodDay (talk) 22:23, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jorfer,

Once again I've received personal insults and attacks by a member who seems to think this is fine. His user talk page is just rife with people telling him to stop with the insults and disparaging comments. The only thing I can think to do is to request he be blocked, and I'm not sure why he hasn't been in the past after looking at the numerous individuals commenting on this problem on his own talk page. Although I found information on what a user block is, I can't seem to find any info on how to actually request a user block, which at this point I think is warranted. If you know how to request a block, I'd appreciate the info. Thanks...
Howaboutyouthinkaboutit (talk) 09:43, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jorfer. Please see the Street Art talk page. If you could clarify the reason for reversion, that'd be great. Thanks! GnarlyLikeWhoa (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I can justify that the bills contain these articles. I gave the paragraph numbers for each reported bill. If you need the links they are easy to find with a Google search or from the relevant WP articles for each bill. You are being a bit of a naughty naughty editor for sowing needless doubt into the minds of WP readers. People might think you had an ulterior motive. And we wouldn't want that, surely.--Hauskalainen (talk) 00:47, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:11-26-06 1535.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. FASTILY_sock ^(TALK) 01:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stop deleting my contributions. Now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Registry Editor (talk • contribs) 15:41, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article Randall-Reilly Publishing Co., LLC has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable company. See the relevant notability guideline.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bfigura ^(talk) 16:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I relocated the "students doing research in library" photo to the "As a pedagogical tool" section. I didn't meean to imply by putting it in the lede that only students do essays. I appreciate your concerns about the appropriateness of photos. Interestingly, WP:Images says that you are allowed to illustrate abstract concepts with pictures. The example they give is that you could illustrate "social inequality" with a photo of a poor person standing near an expensive car. Now "essay" is not an abstract concept like "social inequality"...you could have a photo of an essay. It's just that, well...a photo of an essay wouldn't look very interesting. It would be a piece of paper with typing on it :)............... as such, I was trying to think of a way of illustrating the process of writing an essay. I guess another way to illustrate "essay" is with photos or paintings of famous essayists. What do you think?OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 20:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have Tinnitus yet from wearing those ear phones?173.61.94.34 (talk) 21:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Lestrade[reply]

They are earmuffs and no.--Jorfer (talk) 16:41, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Meetup/Miami 3 is coming up in the near future, you are invited to participate. Thanks Secret ^account 17:27, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has disturbed me to discover that the majority of the population do not seem to understand what a direct quote is. I share your bemusement. Pdfpdf (talk) 10:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should also be pointed out that an alumnus is someone who formerly attended a school. Thus, if I formerly attended Dade Christian, I would be an alumnus thereof. (And if my daughter had attended it, she would be an alumna [Latin is like that].) --Orange Mike | Talk 19:09, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Jennifer Wilson (reality show contestant), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jennifer Wilson (reality show contestant). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Shadowjams (talk) 03:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believed that my image would be public domain as taken in Japan, since AFAIK product display cases aren't copyrighted, and also there are multiple packages displayed, and the focus is on two products.

There is a trademark with Disney, and that is indicated. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I assume so, yuss. Ironholds (talk) 02:55, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed a recent edit and upload of yours and have reverted your edit and started a discussion thread here. Would you be able to comment there? Carcharoth (talk) 01:58, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented further there and on Commons (I left a message on your Commons talk page, but not sure how often you check that). Carcharoth (talk) 03:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It's my understanding that the German Wikipedia allows locally pictures of buildings and sculptures standing in public places, even though the country there standing in doesn't recognize FoP. You may be able to get more information from User:Chaddy, who requested the transfer of those pictures to de: Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:08, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Euthanasia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you list your Art as Experience and Issues in Economics grades on your profile? Do you post them on your door in your dorm too? It's weird. Otherwise, keep up the good work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.89.82.142 (talk) 12:30, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I deal with economics issues on Wikipedia sometimes. It demonstrates my credentials. My Art as Experience grade could be useful to have on there in the future in the same way.--Jorfer (talk) 20:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why have you reverted my edit to Gerrymandering, calling it POV? An upcoming boundary review of UK Parliamentary constituencies was listed as an example of gerrymandering. The citation given is from an opposition politician (Jack Straw) calling it so. But just because Straw, or in fact any politician, says something is "gerrymandering", that doesn't make it true. In fact, as I said in my edit comment, the UK has an independent Electoral Commission, so it is hard to see exactly how gerrymandering could take place. But regardless, unless there's a neutral source calling the boundary review "gerrymandering", I see no reason why it should be listed as an example, and that's why I deleted that section.

And I guess by calling my edit POV, you are implying that I am supportive of the UK coalition government in some way. For what it's worth, I am not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.110.189.135 (talk) 21:25, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I responded at User talk:91.110.189.135.--Jorfer (talk) 03:11, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Casa Poporului.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 05:33, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To replace the existing blurry, old image here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Miami/Header Add this, I couldn't get it to come out right even with a reduced size image. I don't do any sort of complex code, at all. File:Miami Night Skyline from Watson Island.jpg Daniel Christensen (talk) 22:41, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay that's actually a crop of one of my photos, do you mean longer relative to width, ot larger in number of pixels? Because that was not the original file of the image. I think the night skyline looks really good and should be put somewhere. It's better than the night image that was there before that wasn't even identifiable as Miami unless you already knew it was. Daniel Christensen (talk) 14:24, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the larger file I will try: File:Downtown Miami Night Skyline from Watson Island.jpg

2,560 x 1066 Daniel Christensen (talk) 16:03, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And it's no good. Something is messed up, too complicated, with that header because no image is coming out right, it's just that the ratio of some makes them less bad than others. Wait a minute... Daniel Christensen (talk) 16:09, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I got it to fit, but something is messed up with the header such that, regardless of the image used, it is coming out significantly lower in quality than it should, and it's not just a matter of scaling and mismatched pixels, the color is bad as well, and they are exceptionally blurry. Daniel Christensen (talk) 16:24, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you in the Miami area currently?

If so, would you mind photographing any one of these Publix Sabor locations?

• Hialeah Mercado 1585 West 49th Street Hialeah, FL 33012-2924
• Miller Square Shopping Center - 13890 SW 56th St Miami, FL 33175-6021
• Publix Sabor Coral Way Shopping Center - 8680 SW 24th St Miami, FL 33155-2338

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 06:36, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I am not currently in Miami.--Jorfer (talk) 17:26, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My name is Sara Marks and I am doing research for a masters thesis at Fitchburg State University. My thesis has to do with resolving conflicts on Wikipedia entries and I am focusing on what happened to the Paul Revere entry after Palin's comments last summer. I have been going through the archives and would really like to talk to you about what happened after her comments, especially your part in it. I want to get a better idea of what happened and your thoughts on the resolution process. You can get back to me on your talk page, my talk page or via email at librarygurl at gmail.com. I can also answer any questions you may have about my thesis. I look forward to hearing from you. --LibraryGurl (talk) 19:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back to me. I have some questions, but first you just need to review the informed consent form. Once I have that I can email you the questions I have and you can respond via email. I know you may not remember things. I will provide links to specific aspects of the talk archive for questions that may require some review of those events. --LibraryGurl (talk) 14:23, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:WikiProject Energy development articles, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 04:34, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I noticed you listed yourself as a participant of the Energy WikiProject.

There are 2 new outlines in this area that attempt to consolidate Wikipedia's coverage of their respective subjects, gathering and organizing the articles about them into one place and including descriptions for convenience. The purposes of these outlines are to make it easier for readers to survey or review a whole subject, and to choose from Wikipedia's many articles about it.

The new energy outlines are:

• Outline of solar energy
• Outline of wind energy

Please take a look at them, and....

if you spot missing topics, add them in.

if you can, improve the descriptions.

add missing descriptions.

show parent-offspring relationships (with indents).

fix errors.

For more information about the format and functions of outlines, see Wikipedia:Outlines.

Building outlines of existing material (such as Wikipedia) is called "reverse outlining". Reverse outlines are useful as a revision tool, for identifying gaps in coverage and for spotting poor structuring.

Revising a work with multiple articles (such as Wikipedia) is a little different than revising a paper. But the general principles are the same...

As you develop these outlines, you may notice things about the articles they organize. Like what topics are not adequately covered, better ways to structure and present the material, awkward titles, articles that need splitting, article sections lacking {{Main}} links, etc.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Outlines.

Thank you. Sincerely, The Transhumanist 00:48, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: see also Outline of energy

File:Miami River Map.JPG has this notice:

{{subst:Wrong license note|1=File:Miami River Map.JPG}}

I know I'm not formatting it right, but you get the idea? Best, MathewTownsend (talk) 20:07, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tampa Snow.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. 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. George Ho (talk) 18:18, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Energy Wikiproject.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. 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. Kelly ^hi! 00:18, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:What's the use of going through with the Election.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. Marchjuly (talk) 16:01, 21 November 2015 (UTC) -- Marchjuly (talk) 16:01, 21 November 2015 (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) 16:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:What's the use of going through with the Election.JPG. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:29, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:28, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Randall-Reilly 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/Randall-Reilly until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 21:15, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 00:30, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Dade Christian School.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Poor quality file not being used in any constructive way. File would have no obvious value being hosted on Commons

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. Salavat (talk) 07:39, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Korean Memorial3.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

File not being used in any constructive way. File would have no obvious value being hosted on Commons

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. Salavat (talk) 07:42, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Korean Memorial6.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

File not being used in any constructive way. File would have no obvious value being hosted on Commons

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. Salavat (talk) 07:42, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Korean Memorial7.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

File not being used in any constructive way. File would have no obvious value being hosted on Commons

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. Salavat (talk) 07:42, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:The Space Window.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Poor quality file not being used in any constructive way. File would have no obvious value being hosted on Commons

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. Salavat (talk) 07:42, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Requests for Miami peer review requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:17, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Image from the Florida Photographic Collection has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:44, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720 (talk) 02:16, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Miami/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:25, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Key Biscayne has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 14:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]