User talk:SM247

Welcome!

Hello, SM247, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

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!  Karmafist 01:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Rextology

Did you protesting Rextology have anything to do with me coming from New South Wales? Ahh yes, XXXX beer counts as alcohol. (Rextu 12:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC))

Busway Stations

The reason why I have put the bus routes for the Queen Street Bus Station and Cultural Centre Busway Station onto their own separate pages, is because the bus route information swamped the information on the two main article pages by the sheer large volume of the number of buses (plus their route information) which use these two stations. The main article pages are supposed to be about the bus stations themselves, as article pages within an international encyclopedia - the article pages are not supposed to be about the buses and the bus routes. The bus route information does not need to be on the main pages for the stations. Brisbane people, who are interested in which buses leave which of these two bus stations, are still able to find out what they want to know by clicking on the links on the main pages for bus route information for the stations which I have set up, using the information you supplied.

The only bus stations, which, I think (at the moment), will need to have the listing of bus routes on a separate special page, are the Queen Street Bus Station and Cultural Centre Busway Station (which now have their own pages) and also King George Square Busway Station.

The reason why I am thinking of, for the future, a separate page for bus routes for King George Square Busway Station, is because the bus station may possibly eventually carry a far greater volume of buses, in the future, than it would appear to be going to do at the moment. If indications are correct, future plans, by the Brisbane City Council, suggest that the buses may eventually go to the Queen Street Bus Station via the King George Square Busway Station, instead of through the entrance/exit portal in front of the Treasury Casino. If this is so, then the King George Square Busway Station might eventually have a listing as large, or perhaps even larger, than the number of buses which use the Cultural Centre Busway Station.

This problem should not occur with suburban busway stations, where the number of buses using the stations are a lot less in number. Therefore, it would be okay to leave the bus route information on the suburban busway stations pages. Figaro 23:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

User page

Sorry. I accidentally edited your user page with my previous comment about busway stations. When I discovered my error, I immediately moved the comment to your talk page. Again, sorry for the error. Figaro 23:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Brisbane Central railway station (Bus routes)

Hey there.

I've decided to move the bus routes for Central to a separate page. Seeing that Brisbane is also a hub for many bus services. I understand that South East Queensland public transport is integrated, but the numerous amont of bus services in the city flooded what should normally be a railway station article. I understand that Figaro has already done Roma Street.

However, bus connections listed from many suburban railway stations would be ok seeing there isnt as much services as the ones from the city stations. Arnzy 05:54, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

The Capalaba afd

I looked through your bus station project a little. It's huge and detailed, it would be a shame to delete it (as deleting the one put up for afd would justify deleting the other ones). You could compare it to Paris Métro if you want to justify it. However, it's considered to be the metro system, and would have no notability problems. Obli (Talk) 10:54, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

CityTrain Lines: stations template

I'll see what I can do, but modified templates may have to be done for the small lines (ie Doomben, Airport, Corinda via South Brisbane), considering all trains on those mentioned lines (except Airport) are all-stops trains. -- Arnzy (Talk) 01:26, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

Your article TransLink (South East Queensland) services has been listed for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TransLink (South East Queensland) services. --WikiCats 11:50, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

TransLink bus routes servicing...

Hi SM247. I came across your Ebbw Vale railway station, Brisbane article through the Random article link, and I noticed the highly unusual TransLink bus routes servicing section. If I could I'd like to give you a few styling tips:

• The See also section is a standard appendix, so you should put the Translink section above it, not below.
• This section really should be a template of some sort, like an infobox, or be incorporated into the regular text. Why does it warrant its own section?
• Avoid putting links in the section header.

If you'd like help fixing these issues, let me know. I'd be glad to lend a hand. ~MDD4696 22:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your hints. In future, I want to modify all the TransLink articles mentioning bus routes in some fashion that will enable the standard route details at TransLink (South East Queensland) services to be template-linked (i.e. so that any changes made there will also change references in other articles, saving a huge amount of time).

As long as there is still a link to the services page somewhere, feel free to modify the headings.

My editing was just intended to be an interim standardisation of all the station articles which were formerly all over the place depending on which line you looked at. I'd like to see them all standard format, but if you want to change the layout, by all means. I'm not so skilled in that regard. SM247 00:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

CBD rail stations templates

Yeah, I've put the lines in order of the same next stations template to keep the consistency at the time. But I'll have a look at it, and would have to agree that it would need to be moved to keep to consistency and to keep the lines with the same colour next to each other.

Also furthermore, can you have a look at talk page for the NCL, there is a discussion i started whether if the Nambour/Gympie line should be split from the article. Some draft stuff is in the sandbox of my user page. --Arnzy ^{(whats up?)} 04:47, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Moving pages

Do not copy and paste pages to move them, this loses the edit history. Use the "move this page" function. We also like to have pages with the most common name, so moving "Millennium train" to "M set" is not the best idea. Also note the naming convention for articles -- only capitalize proper nouns. Dysprosia 10:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

"Set" is still very far from titling conventions. Redirects will pick up any variants in naming that exist. Dysprosia 01:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Edit summary

Hi SM. I have noted that you don't usually provide an edit summary. It is helpful when following up edits to have an edit summary. Keep up the good work. --WikiCats 10:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I try when possible, but sometimes I make repetitive changes to a large series of articles, and it is truly a pain in the arse to do one for each, especially if it is non-substantial edit only (e.g. where one thing is cut 'n' pasted into many articles). SM247 20:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi! If you could use edit summaries on AfD, that would be great. I follow carefully the AfDs I'm involved in, and if I can tell from the summary what you've done then I don't have to click through to the diff. Thanks, William

Metroad markers

Hi SM247, no worries =). By the way, are there any more Brisbane place names to add to Australian English vocabulary#Place names? Cheers. -Techelf 08:18, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Olny Surfers that I can think of right now. SM247 20:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Authedu permenantly blocked

I decided that I should let you know that User:Authedu whom you have had grievences with in the past has been permenantly blocked today for vandalism. It's kind of interesting that he thinks that adding things such as this is simply "being balanced":

"THE SOUTHPORT SCHOOL IS A FUCKHOLE AND GREG WAIN IS OUT TO SCREW EVERYBODY FOR MORE MONEY. IF YOU HAVE A CHILD MAKE SURE YOU DON'T SEND HIM or HER TO THE SOUTHPORT SHITHOLE."

Best wishes--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 03:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Excellent. SM247 04:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

TSS

• I also have no idea what you are talking about (new heading??) Casiohyp 08:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Just in case you don't know the pword as it has been changed it is the only building ending with o. Casiohyp 09:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

• I am sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about. Please start new messages with a new heading at the bottom instead of hiding them and please try to make yourself more clear in future. SM247^{My Talk} 02:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

With the greatest respect, I found your message to be condescending. I am certain that myself and the many other users you evaluate would benefit from constructive criticism rather than blatant statements. However, I am thankful for your suggestions. You said you have "no difficulties with well-written work that criticises the School and indeed [you] encourage it." I am disappointed with this statement. The statement, as I understand, communicates that all comments posted on the TSS ‘wikipage' must be validated by primarily you. I would appreciate other users contributing their two penneth. Please forgive me, I am unfamiliar with Wikipedia and such a suggestion may be ludicrous, but I am in favour of balance and from your comment, I deduce, that so are you.

Would you like to contribute an article that communicates another interpretation of the School? - Regards 144.133.216.231.

I am sorry that you found my comments condescending, but the page has been attracting poorly written comments by members of the School who obviously have no grasp of Wikipolicies. As it stands, I (and any other user) have a right to edit the page and I do not tolerate badly constructed sentences or thoughts. As I said, what is needed is verification such as newspaper articles, official reports etc and the like. I do not doubt the validity of your premise, but the way it was expressed can be better worded.

All in all - I am obviously biased in favour of the School and I do not deny that, but what that means is that I do not like to see a poorly written article. For example, see edits and comments made by User:Authedu (who has since been banned) and references to particular current students who are not notable or which have been made in bad faith and poor taste.

I dearly hope I have not insulted you, for that was not my intention. SM247 22:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I am pleased to see your rendition of 'Academic Pursuits' on the TSS 'wikipage'. I hope you do not mind but I added the word 'two' before the mention of OP3. I hope this does not upset, if it does, I am more than happy to work towards a solution.

I am not sure how much you are involved with the School (are you possibly an old-boy?), but you may remember the tantrums thrown over last year's OP results? Well, this issue is the topic of discussion amongst TSS staff and students alike, and it appears Mr. Authedu had his own ‘strongly-worded’ thoughts to share on the matter... Would it frustrate you to see a quick, balanced summation of ‘for’ and ‘against’ the 2005 OP conundrum, possibly under 'Academic Pursuits'? Furthermore, you stated above you required that users supply 'newspaper articles' (or official reports and such forth) to validate their postings, well, what are your thoughts on this one: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,18691803-1248,00.html - Regards 144.133.216.231.

Well, essentially, the academic results of one year aren't extremely encyclopaedic, you see, and last year was an aberration anyway compared to previous years. For a start, as mentioned in that article, the figures are meaningless as they only reflect an entrance rank for university - they do not reflect whether the student has a better quality education. Also, the fact that TSS is not a selective school is relevant here. But, feel free to write something. Jammo (SM247) 20:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok. I'll leave it at that. 144.133.216.231 08:27, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Requesting a lock is probably for the best at the moment, is that the restriction where only registered users may edit? -Bunza 07:09, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Tomadelete?

Did you really have to go there?? Tomachuck is a valid word, and it will find its home on wikipedia... it may take a little more time for it to catch on, but it will have its day... I hope that nonone tomachucks you in your sleep.

No, it will not, because it is an unverified tomaneologism. Please make proper edits, or if you must edit badly, at least be funny. SM247 02:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Raymond E. Feist articles

Hello,

While searching around the "What links here" list attached to the Raymond E. Feist article looking for other Wikipedias who may be fans, I found you. Currently I am working on expanding the related articles of the Riftwar books, but there is a lot of ground to cover with 20 books to look through. I am hoping to gather other editors who may be willing to spend a little time to help out. There are articles which need expanding and clean-up, and I don't think I can do it alone.

The current articles are (red links to be started): The series articles:

• Riftwar
• Krondor's Sons
• Empire Trilogy
• Serpentwar Saga
• Riftwar Legacy
• Legends of the Riftwar
• Conclave of Shadows
• Darkwar Saga

Other articles:

• Midkemia
  • Triagia
    • The Kingdom of the Isles
    • The Empire of Great Kesh
    • The Kingdom of Roldem
    • The Kingdom of Queg
    • The Eastern Kingdoms
    • The Free Cities of Natal
    • The Keshian Confederacy
    • Elvandar
    • The Grey Towers
    • Stone Mountain (Midkemia)
    • Dorgin
  • Novindus
• Kelewan
• Worlds of Raymond E. Feist (title pending) - this article would cover those other worlds visited through rifts and the Hall of Worlds, and even the City Forever and the Garden.
• Races of the Riftwar sagas (title pending)
• Gods of the Riftwar sagas (title pending) - not only are there gods of Midkemia and Kelewan, but one other full pantheon mentioned in Krondor: The Betrayal.

And there is probably more that I haven't even thought of yet, which I am hoping you might.

This message has been sent to AbsoluteZero, Alkanen, Deathphoenix, El Pollo Diablo, Epideme, Painbearer, and SM247.
—Lady Aleena talk/contribs 22:45, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest in my interest, Lady Aleena - however, it has been some time since I have read any Feist. The last I read was Flight of the Nighthawks (really any of the new ones when they come out over here), and I haven't read Magician in about 5 years. More than happy to help with general editing, but my knowledge of content is getting dimmer. In fact, I had forgotten the distinction between higher and lower path magic until I looked into it. Sorry about that. Jammo (SM247) 00:11, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

WHY ARE WE HERE

Greetings! I was wondering what you saw in the article WHY ARE WE HERE that warranted discussion over its deletion. It had been proposed for deletion, and I thought it could have progressed along just fine there without needing sent through the AfD process. —C.Fred (talk) 15:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

My mistake. I am still learning. Jammo (SM247) 20:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Team Dynasty

In Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dynasty Paintball, you mentioned that Team Dynasty should also be discussed. Well, it survived its AfD on May 27 with a clear Keep, so I have doubts about relisting it myself. If you want to relist it, feel free to do so. ;) Regards, Kimchi.sg 02:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I've made comments about your remark in the AfD too. Kimchi.sg 02:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Inclusion is not an indicatory of notability (essay)

You made a point recently at an AfD that inspired me to write an essay on how inclusion is not an indicator of notability. I see this point made often at AfD, and I thought it would be handy to have a shorthand for it. It's at WP:INN. I don't have a good feel yet for whether it's necessary or wise. What do you think? Also, I welcome any changes you can think of before I move it into namespace.--Kchase02 T 07:41, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it is an excellent idea and can be expounded. I am severely biased towards common law (Commonwealth) legal systems being an Australian final semester law student, so I agree generally with the doctrine of precedents. The problem is that even in the judicial sphere judgments can be wrongly made. Here, people with no idea of policy can do anything they please, so the scope for its application is quite weak.

I agree generally with the use of precedents in Wikipedia, as I also want to see consistent application of policy. Here I am talking about previous AfD's/speedies etc which are directly analogous/similar etc to articles in dispute, cited either in aid of or defence against deletion. A Wikiprudence, as it were. However, this relates to the way policies are applied and developed, and doesn't relate to the fact that particular pages cited in the defence of an AfD'ed article (by its creator for example) have not been proposed for deletion. As you rightly have pointed out, Wikipedia is getting vaster and articles slip under the radar.

A possible addition to your essay - citing an article which has apparently survived unscathed does not validate that article, but may indeed expose that article to an AfD or similar procedure.

I am no authority on this - note for example my most recent blunder in this sphere: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/WHY_ARE_WE_HERE. I am still learning, but my grounding in law has really got me interested in AfD discussions. Jammo (SM247) 08:11, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate the positive feedback. Like I said, feel free to edit away, expand the scope, retitle, whatever. Once we're satisfied, we can move it into namespace. If you see others using the reasoning, please mention it to them. I added your suggestion, but didn't integrate it, in part b/c it already seems to be mentioned elsewhere. It's the second paragraph now. What do you think of the shortcut? Would INC for "Inclusion is Not a Criterion" be more appropriate, since this could apply to verifiability, validity, quality, etc. as well as notability?--Kchase02 T 08:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC) Never mind, INC is taken.--Kchase02 T 08:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe WP:INCL to remove possible ambiguity with WP:CORP or corporate related essays (just a thought, not sure how valid). Cheers. Jammo (SM247) 09:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

More memorable anyway. Done.--Kchase02 T 09:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

The joke of my day

...came from this discussion at WP:AfD:

YOU BETTER DELETE IT!

You got that right! Even Funshine Bear will be wet in her paws when she reads it later today. Maybe it's the most hilarious thing aside those Bad Jokes and other Deleted Nonsense! --Slgrandson 17:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I get bored typing Delete or Keep all the time, so I am always looking for jokes. It pays to have a sense of humour in this world. Jammo (SM247) 20:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Lists: Delete, Keep or Categorize?

I'm writing since I liked your comments on the AfD discussion about deleting lists of railway stations. I see that you've invested a lot of work in similar lists. Have they been subject to an AfD review? If so, how did you defeat a delete? In my comments, I suggested the creation of Wiki categories and their use instead of the creation of lists. Do you think that's a sound idea? Interlingua ^talk 21:28, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Lists are not good for potentially large things, I have found. The article I cited, List of South East Queensland railway stations, can be more properly termed QR CityTrain Network, but the name is the heritage of the page from when it was started, modified slightly. These lists are OK because they group a very specific set of items that is not subject to substantive change now that it has been finished, except for potential new stations which will not be opneing for at least 3 years and future ones after that. They are also more formatted than a mere list of articles. The generic world-wide list is nonsensical because it will have far too many entries.

The page TransLink (South East Queensland) services and predecessor survived 2 AfD's. The issue there was not so much listcruft, but whether it was encyclopaedic information. The page (and related pages) has since been extensively cleaned up, the info can be verified and the table we created has no direct analogue on the website of our regional public transport co-ordinating body (and thus is not a mere substandard timetable or copyvio), so I see no problems anymore.

So, in essence - it is only ever-expanding lists we should be worried about. Lists like the public transport ones I work with usually have a specific number of entries that can be determined and do not change regularly. Even if they are, they are well notified to the public and we can act acordingly.

Only categories should be used for the type of list where you found my comments, as the list is a waste of space. The type of lists I work on use both, but can do so because e.g. there are only about 140-something rail stations, less than 20 busway stations and a similar number of bus interchanges under our system, and size isn't a problem. Jammo (SM247) 21:38, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Bombala

Hi, I noticed your recent edit to Bombala, New South Wales was marked "minor" when it was the addition of a completely new paragraph to the article. Thanks if you can be careful in future not to mark your edits as minor unless they are truly minor. — Donama 01:22, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for correcting my interpretation of minor. My concept of what constitutes a substantial edit appears to be at odds with policy. It was my opinion that one throwaway sentence that did not change the thrust of the article was minor, but apparently this relates to textual/factual/grammatical corrections. My mistake. Jammo (SM247) 01:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mt. Lebanon Percussion

I noticed that you voted speedy delete on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mt. Lebanon Percussion, and I was hoping you could explain your reasoning. I've been working on AfD for almost a year now, and this doesn't seem to meet A7 at all, so I'd like to know why you feel differently. Thanks.--M@rēino 02:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

• Because it seems unremarkable from my perspective (note also there were no sources when I left my remarks). What are the particular assertions of notability made? Jammo (SM247) 02:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

User:Natashasalve

Hi SM247, FYI I've referred Natashasalve to the Administrator's noticeboard if you'd also like to comment. Cheers, -- Netsnipe 09:05, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Wait a bit I think, if we assume bad faith she (assuming here) appears to be a new user, perhaps may be unfamiliar with policies. She may not have read the comments left on her talk. SM247 09:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I am neither a sockpuppet nor a blockhead.

Assume good faith and stop making sweeping generalizations about people based on their vote. Crystallina 02:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

• I do apologise if you took offence. If you read my comment again, you will see that it is directed at those whose only appearance was on that page and who are not applying policy (I addressed vote-stacking, which you will notice is my prime concern). I may not agree with your arguments, but they are based on policy, so my comment should not be taken to refer to you in particular. I further refer to your attention that the page in question is now dead and that as you seem to be a reasonable person your opinion may thus be amenable to change (or not). Cheers SM247^{My Talk} 02:37, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • The site works fine for me; I assume it went down shortly because of high activity. It's happened before today. That comment wasn't directed in you in particular; there were a couple of people doing it. Crystallina 02:43, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Fair enough, it does seem to still exist, but there is bugger all independent information about it and it is cryptic speculation, with an AfD flooded with (other than yours and similar opposing views to my own) non-reasoned posts. SM247^{My Talk} 02:58, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment user has been reported to wear socks, so may be a sockpuppet, the jury is still out on any blockheadism charges. Also, user should kiss and make up with other user. Go on you two. -Superbeatles 05:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I'm not sure what you are getting at, I wasn't attacking Crystallina as I just made clear, but the random vote-stacking posts made by non-contributors to Wikipedia. I thought I had more than made up anyway, as you can see above. SM247^{My Talk} 20:38, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

re: Afd Chi Coltrane

I am still new here, as you might have figured out. Everyone says that she meets WP:MUSIC. What were the awards? She has only had two albums and neither of them were gold, or etc. Are people voting their taste in music? Or do the guidelines need to be rewritten? I ask you these questions seriously. I am too new at this to be able to tell the difference. Thanks. Ste4k 17:56, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

• She has had a charted hit in at least two countries and released two albums. That meets WP:MUSIC. SM247^{My Talk} 20:42, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

On the same subject, can you take a look at the comment he and I left on my talk page and see if I was out of line/incorrect at all? User_talk:Viridae#Verifiable. (noticed you as a solid voter at AfD) Viridae^Talk 23:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry. Its sorting itself out. :) Seeya around. Viridae^Talk 23:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Glad to hear it - I was composing this response just now: It was an interesting discussion of policy, but I personally lean towards Viridae's view. I don't like the idea of proposing something for AfD if in the time it takes to do that, the person nominating can just as easily fix the article themself. It's only unsourced OR and the like that really should go to AfD on the basis of WP:V from what I have seen, as there is no verifiable information. WP:V deals with verifiability, not with the adequacy of verification in an article at a given time. If there is a paucity of citation, people should fix it; if there is no information available about it, it should go. Despite what the policy says about the obligation lying on those wanting inclusion, the overarching principle is that anybody can edit Wikipedia. SM247^{My Talk} 23:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks anyway - you can have a look still if you want. It has turned into quite an essay. Viridae^Talk 04:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Untitled_Superman_Sequel

Please revisit your reluctant delete vote for this page. I and another user have worked hard in the last week to improve the page. Thank you for your consideration.ThuranX 15:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Eagle Street Pier

Thanks for the heads up on it's status. We have enough articles to keep us busy in the project. We are looking for someone from down under to help us in WP:PIERS Project. Join us if you have the time.--Paul E. Ester 17:07, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

This is currently all we have if were missing any good ones let me know. Any category: pleasure, fishing, working are interesting. Thanks!--Paul E. Ester 17:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not too familiar with any notable ones off the top of my head. My purpose with the Brisbane articles was to have them as part of a comprehensive series about Brisbane's public transport. There are a few piers in the region but none of any notability (certainly not the same as the other two). Cheers, SM247^{My Talk} 21:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

{{User:UBX/Monty Python}}

Hello there...see the above template...it takes the place of {{User Nudge Nudge}} and almost all of the other Monty Python user templates.
—Lady Aleena talk/contribs 07:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, a better way to sort them. SM247^{My Talk} 08:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello there...I have come up with a whole slew of new usages for the User Monty Python userbox. They are currently located in my sandbox. I would like your opinion before I put them up for general consumption, and if you have any other suggestions, please let me know.
—Lady Aleena talk/contribs 21:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

TransLink Station infoboxes

Just to let you know, I'm going to apply this code below to all infoboxes of all modes. {{#if:{{{image|}}} |<tr><td colspan="2" style="text-align: center;">[[Image:{{{image|}}}|250px]]</td></tr> }}

That way, It'll show a picture if it has a picture installed, and it doesnt show the text if there is no picture for that infobox. I'll apply it in the meantime untill I can get a generic non-fair use picture to replace it. --Arnzy ^{(whats up?)} 07:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

• OK. Try the Commons as this problem has probably cropped up before, unless you want to make a more specific one for each box or all four. SM247^{My Talk} 07:13, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The remaining Beenleigh Line stations are done. All we got to do for the remaining train stations are the Ipswich Line south of Corinda, and the Cleveland Line. --Arnzy ^{(whats up?)} 07:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

• Also, I like the platform/services template box - looks neater than just bullets. It would really set off the Central page in particular. Once eveything is done it will be easier to convert. SM247^{My Talk} 07:26, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

• Re Ferry station infoboxes.. I've changed the text to black on the second line of the service_area4 section. {{!}} colspan="2" style="text-align: center; color:{{{servicearea_textcolor4|black}}}; --Arnzy ^{(whats up?)} 08:30, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Shopping Mall articles

Hi, you recently voted to keeep the article Macarthur Square. Could you please suggest something that could be added to the article to make it notable compared to all the other articles for shopping malls on Wikipedia? I ask this because I cannot see what makes one shopping centre notable compared to the one in the next suburb. Not every house has an article, why should every shopping centre? Thanks, I hope to implement some of your suggestions. I am happy to conduct a reasonable amount of web-based investigation to implement some of your thoughts. --Garrie 05:53, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

• I cannot suggest anything. I think it is notable because it has large anchor stores and is an important economic hub for the particular area. Houses are consderably different to large shopping centres, so that line of reasoning hardly stands up. otability is a very vague criterion anyway at present and not one on which we should solely rely. Good luck finding something. SM247^{My Talk} 20:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

it has large anchor stores - what does this mean? does having a Woolworths makes it a worthy candidate? my local shopping centre consists of a Woolworths, a Dan Murphys, some ATMs. Is that enough? what if I add a K-mart? where's the line?

If you cannot suggest anything notable then why vote to retain the article? While I agree that no conceptual difference to railway stations or other geographical features. We keep other large shopping centres - I dispute the articles being there. See WP:Notability, and from WP:AFDP note that Subway and railway stations are allowed, but notability is currently under discussion[1]

it's not notable, but other equally non-notable articles exist will only serve to make this the repository of any article anyone ever wishes to write.

sorry, this is sounding like a rant. I don't want it to. But I do want to reduce the number of articles that all say "my local mall has a woolies, a dick smith and a target so it's notable". If they can be easily grouped (such as my Westfield's proposal) I hope that is a worthwhile thing?

--Garrie 05:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

All Westfields are the same

Please see my suggestion that All Westfields are the same, and my proposed new article, Westfields in Australia.

I intend to propose a merger on every Westfield article in Australia. One article will probably stay (almost) current! --Garrie 05:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations

Hi SM and congratulations on the hard work you have done on these projects. If you would like to say hello, please email me. --WikiCats 02:55, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

List of bus routes in Sydney

Mako is proposing the Sydney bus routes page for deletion. As you appear to have done a fair bit of work on the SE Queensland routes I was wondering if you could speak up on the Sydney route talk page and save it from deletion. I'm afraid he'll start proposing all bus route pages for deletion if that one gets through. (JROBBO 08:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC))

TransLink templates

You wrote on my talk page:

Thank you for your help on this score. There are a few problems though. The exceptions to the general formatting seem to not be working properly. E.g. at Brookside, the routes 598 and 599 should both be in dark blue and operated by 'BT', not turqoise and LCBS, because although they fall into the turqoise range (540-599), they are considered to be part of the special dark blue range (Brisbane Central). Something in the templates didn't work quite smoothly here. The various other exceptions were all included in each array template and are still there after your changes, not sure what's happened. It only seems to be a problem for the text and not table entries. Im no expert, so could you please see what's up? Cheers. SM247^{My Talk} 00:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Oops! Yes…sorry about that. It's to do with a difference between how the {{#switch}} function works and how template parameters work: with the former, the first hit takes precedence, with the latter it's the last. I've fixed {{TL Region Name}}: if there are any more, let me know…or even do it yourself if you like. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 06:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and I caught {{TL Route Operator}} as well. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 07:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Undeletion of Sydney Bus Route article

Hi SM247, you recently contributed to the deletion review about the Sydney bus routes. We're requesting an undeletion here and I'd appreciate your help in getting this decision overturned. I don't think there was a consensus on deletion. (JROBBO 06:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC))

Sydney Bus routes

Hi SM247, I know you did a lot of work on the Sydney Bus articles - can you or Quaidy save the route pages to your userfile and convert them into a templated format like the SE Queensland ones? This debate is being overridden by Americans who don't care about anything to do with Sydney. (JROBBO 05:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC))

• Unfortunately I don't have a lot of time presently. Do it yourself by all means, but feel entirely free to ask me if you want a hand later on. Matt ke has been doing a lot of work on our pages up here and has really improved the markup and presentation with hide/show functions etc, there's always Arnzy as well. One problem you will have is with the point about indiscriminacy. You probably need to just keep to existing routes to get around that. SM247^{My Talk} 05:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

• • Hey, ooh I see my username! Sorry for interrupting! Must be something of my interest, hehe. Anyway back to business. There are two problems actually. First is the template. There was some changes to it apparently (from observation) so if it has to display a lot of routes by parsing it may not work. Have a look at bus routes servicing Cultural Centre Busway Station and you will understand. Second is the directory nature. I don't want to comment unless necessary but certainly if it gives more information like services types (like X and E-prefixed services are limited stops, routes like 380 are overnight services, etc, routes 130-199 service the northern beaches, and so on and forth. Most importantly, I have never came across anywhere which gives out general information like that.) might actually increase the chances of having the page being kept. I would propose to switch to a summary table like grouping routes according to major interchanges if it is getting deleted. From what I see so far the best way is to squeeze the route descriptions into Buses in Sydney under routes. Hiding them using show/hide is also a good thing to do actually so it looks more tidier. Matt ke 08:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Given that you now have the hide function, it might be a good idea to collapse all the pages that are separate from their referring pages into the original. E.g. Cultural Centre routes go back on the Cultural Centre page, same maybe even for the entire TransLink routes page if we can splice the most important parts of the two existing separate pages together. My main objective for the moment (when I get around to it) is assisting with the Brisbane railway pages, but something to consider eventually. SM247^{My Talk} 00:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
      • Just worked on Cultural Centre and South Bank pages, and it looks alright so far. Matt ke 03:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
        • Cultural Centre looks fine, but for South Bank, the table heading seems to cut across the photo - it might just be my screen though. SM247^{My Talk} 05:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
        • It is because of browser problems. Internet Explorer looks fine while Firefox is not.Matt ke 09:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
          • Yep, I use Firefox. It should still be able to be fixed though, I do all my Wiki-work on Firefox and usually have no probs. Sorry I can't assist however as I'm not familiar with these tables yet. SM247^{My Talk} 23:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
            • I tried yesterday by adding code to the navframe. style=“position:relative; right:28em;“. I am being too lazy to add them ;Pmatt-(my page-leave me a message) 03:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

TransLink Busway Network Page

Gday SM247, if you're interested and got the time, I'm currently working on a Busways in Brisbane general article before its encyclopedic enough to be posted onto the Wikipedia mainspace. You are welcome to contribute, especially on information such as the early history, the opening of the SE Busway and so forth. It is currently in my sandbox on my user page through User:Arnzy/TransLink Busway Network. Cheers --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 14:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

• Good start, probably don't need to quote the legislation though (from the Transport Infrastructure Act?) (possible copyvio as well if it is). SM247^{My Talk} 03:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

TransLink (South East Queensland) bus stations template

Hi SM. You may wish to change Harbour Town Bus Station, New South Wales to Harbour Town Gold Coast in your template. I don't know how to get to it. --WikiCats 01:28, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

• Hi WikiCats, not entirely sure what you are getting at, possibly clarify it please? SM247^{My Talk} 11:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kodai road

I thought you might want to express your opinion on this AfD. Tubezone 20:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Week

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for your work to WP:WPGC. Punk Boi 8 09:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you, I shall endeavour to carry ou some more Gold Coast works soon. SM247^{My Talk} 11:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD

Hi SM247, this is a message I'm posting to everyone who participated in this AfD. I have nominated the same article for deletion again here – you might be interested. Regards, KissL 08:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello! Since a merge from Race science to Scientific racism did not get consensus, and that this is a POV fork, I've submitted a second Afd request. I hope you can quickly check it out, cheers! Tazmaniacs 17:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject: Gold Coast - Nerang State High School

Hello Wikipedian and fellow WikiProject: Gold Coast member,

I am currently editing the Nerang State High School article and am asking if you could contribute to the article in any way. I would very much appreciate all help in this article. Hpfan9374 11:13, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Brisbane meetup

	Brisbane Meetup Next: To be decided (watch) Last: Saturday 13 January 2018
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

Delivered on behalf of Dihydrogen Monoxide. Giggabot (talk) 14:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Exhibition line (anti-clockwise) colour

A tag has been placed on Template:Exhibition line (anti-clockwise) colour 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.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Exhibition line (anti-clockwise) link

A tag has been placed on Template:Exhibition line (anti-clockwise) link 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.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Exhibition line (clockwise) colour

A tag has been placed on Template:Exhibition line (clockwise) colour 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.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:10, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Exhibition line (clockwise) link

A tag has been placed on Template:Exhibition line (clockwise) link 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.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:10, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Exhibition line colour

A tag has been placed on Template:Exhibition line colour 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.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:10, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Exhibition line link

A tag has been placed on Template:Exhibition line link 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.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:10, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Kangaroo Point Cross River Ferry colour

A tag has been placed on Template:Kangaroo Point Cross River Ferry colour 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>{{tranclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Kangaroo Point Cross River Ferry link

A tag has been placed on Template:Kangaroo Point Cross River Ferry link 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>{{tranclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:User Look Around You

A tag has been placed on Template:User Look Around You 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) 04:16, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:User The Southport School

A tag has been placed on Template:User The Southport School 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) 19:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Copyright of Image:Kangaroo Bus Lines.JPG

Hello. While updating Kangaroo Bus Lines, I clicked on the photo you uploaded and noticed a watermarked copyright claim on the image. You have licensed the image on Wikipedia as either GNU Free Documentation License or Creative Commons Attribution 2.5. Is that your name in the watermark, and is the image really free use? If so, I might suggest the image be cropped for a tighter fit of the subject (probably keeping the bus stop sign since it is a bus at a bus stop), in turn removing the watermark. Thanks in advance for your insight.  SEO⁷⁵ 06:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Brisbane City Council Ferries

A tag has been placed on Template:Brisbane City Council Ferries 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) 02:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Brisbane City Council ferries terminus

A tag has been placed on Template:Brisbane City Council ferries terminus 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) 02:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Bulimba Cross River Ferry colour

A tag has been placed on Template:Bulimba Cross River Ferry colour 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) 02:51, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Bulimba Cross River Ferry link

A tag has been placed on Template:Bulimba Cross River Ferry link 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) 02:51, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Busway terminus

A tag has been placed on Template:Busway terminus 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) 02:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Brisbane meetup invitation

	Brisbane Meetup Next: To be decided (watch) Last: Saturday 13 January 2018
See also: Australian events listed at Wikimedia.org.au (or on Facebook)

Hey there, you're invited to the second Brisbane Meetup. Please see the page at Wikipedia:Meetup/Brisbane/2 for more details. Hope to see you there!

Automated message delivered by Giggabot (stop!) to Wikipedians in Queensland and known Brisbaneites, at 03:53, 7 June 2008 (UTC).

NowCommons: Image:Bribie Island Coaches.JPG

Image:Bribie Island Coaches.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Bribie Island Coaches Scania L94UB.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Bribie Island Coaches Scania L94UB.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 08:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

File:07 Jan 2007 - Nerang Station West -4.JPG is now available as Commons:File:07 Jan 2007 - Nerang Station West -4.JPG. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 10:56, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

wiki project translink

Hi sm247 i would like to invite you to the new wikiproject about translink while the project is still being built i hope your photos and knowledge would help make the project sucssesful Wikipedia:Translink —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt037291 (talk • contribs) 06:50, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Template:User Bond Uni

Template:User Bond Uni, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User Bond Uni and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User Bond Uni during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 07:23, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Westside Bus Company.JPG

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Westside Bus Company.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Capalaba.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Capalaba.JPG, which you've sourced to Steven Jamieson has copyrighted the photo and added a watermark saying so. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 22:31, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Surfside 892 at Burleigh.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Surfside 892 at Burleigh.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:10, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Thompsons Bus Service.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Thompsons Bus Service.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:10, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Mt Gravatt Bus Service.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Mt Gravatt Bus Service.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:10, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Thorneside.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Thorneside.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:11, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Loganholme Bus Station.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Loganholme Bus Station.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:11, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Renault buses at Strathpine interchange (16-02-2007).jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Renault buses at Strathpine interchange (16-02-2007).jpg, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:11, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Surfers Paradise Transit Centre.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Surfers Paradise Transit Centre.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:11, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Bell Street.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Bell Street.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:11, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Victoria Point.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Victoria Point.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:12, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Indooroopilly.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Indooroopilly.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:12, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Carindale.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Carindale.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:12, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Holman Street.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Holman Street.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:12, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Norman Park.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Norman Park.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:12, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:New Farm Park.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:New Farm Park.JPG, which you've sourced to No evidence that uploader is Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:13, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Renault buses at Strathpine interchange (16-02-2007).jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Renault buses at Strathpine interchange (16-02-2007).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 04:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Bell Street.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Bell Street.JPG, which you've attributed to Copyright Steven Jamieson, in the removed watermark. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dianna (talk) 03:43, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Surfers Paradise Transit Centre.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Surfers Paradise Transit Centre.JPG, which you've attributed to Per wartermark: Copyright Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dianna (talk) 23:58, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Surfside 892 at Burleigh.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Surfside 892 at Burleigh.JPG, which you've attributed to Watermarked copyright Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dianna (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Thorneside.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Thorneside.JPG, which you've attributed to Watermarked as copyright Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dianna (talk) 00:02, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Victoria Point.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Victoria Point.JPG, which you've attributed to Watermarked as copyright Steven Jamieson. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dianna (talk) 00:08, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Ferryinfobox.GIF

The file File:Ferryinfobox.GIF has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 17 November 2019 (UTC)