User talk:Beccaynr/Archives/2021/February

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Beccaynr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! BracketBot (talk) 02:17, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Please see my user page for an explanation of my request. Thank you!

Beccaynr (talk) 18:29, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

If all the COI editors we had on Wikipedia were as good as you, we wouldn't need a COI policy at all... You've done excellent work expanding the article, and I for one have no concerns about your editing of it. As far as further improvements go, admins aren't necessarily the best folk to ask for help (when we're wearing our admin hats, we generally just do technical stuff like deletions, blocks and discussion closures), but instead, you might want to try:
Thanks on behalf of Wikipedia for your work in improving the article; I hope you enjoy the process and continue to be a Wikipedian! Yunshui 雲水 07:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the encouragement and additional information about helpful resources! I look forward to learning more and continuing to contribute to Wikipedia, and I greatly appreciate your assistance. Beccaynr (talk) 19:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Chicago Seven template

Thanks for your addition of Noam Chomsky's name, didn't know he had written an introduction and supported the defendants. Nice work. I created the template, and was both active in the anti-war movement and was a journalist at the trial. Actually was in the room with just a few people when the eight were formally indicted and fingerprinted. It was an interesting time, and the people who stood up against the Vietnam War turned out, in the course of history, to be correct (even Robert McNamara agreed). Thanks, and good to meet you. Randy Kryn 20:57 20 October, 2014 (UTC)

It seems I was editing the 1968 Democratic National Convention protest activity page (which you may want to take a look at) - which I hadn't looked at since early March of 2013 - at the same time you were editing the template. Means nothing in the long run, but fun nonetheless (as few edits have gone up on that template). Randy Kryn 21:17 20 October, 2014 (UTC)
I'm still getting the hang of Wikipedia (especially the communication functions), but thank you so much for your comments and encouragement - I have a small pile of books published in the late 1960s and early 1970s that I am using as sources for additions. Very nice to meet you! Beccaynr (talk) 21:25, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Are you sure about the violent radicals as supporters of the Chicago Seven, who had organized nonviolent protests? They don't seem to fit the template, at least to me, and after you put the weather folks on there I read the page and aside from an comment about the timing of their violent actions there was nothing about supporting the Chicago Seven in a meaningful way. And the weather people page also, amazingly, doesn't mention Richard Elrod, who I believe was paralyzed in their Days of Rage demonstration. Lots of people 'supported' the Chicago Seven, maybe the template should just be for active supporters who came to the trial. I remember Dustin Hoffman being there in support, and I interviewed him as he was leaving, but I've never seen another source on his visit (and just remembered it in fact). Anyway, I'm just grumbling, as there was and still is a large gap between nonviolent organizers and participants of a movement and those who come to an issue to harm, hate, and destroy. The two really didn't mix in the '60s era, at least from what I could tell (although Abbie Hoffman dispersed information on using violence to achieve a goal, I don't think he ever used any of that personally). Okay, end of me moaning about having those characters on the template. Personally I 'identified' more with the Phil Ochs, Pigasus type of activist, and never considered using violence to combat violence, nor did the people I knew at the time who were active in the anti-war movement. Randy Kryn 23:49 21 October, 2014 (UTC)
I appreciate the clarification about the 'Supporters' section - I had been thinking that the Weather Underground was probably a better fit for the 'Context' section, and I've moved it in the template. One of the reasons I added Bernardine Dohrn is because her page includes "On September 26, 1969, Dohrn was arrested again in Chicago during a rally in support of the eight men accused of conspiracy concerning the riot during the 1968 Democratic National Convention, who were being tried on riot conspiracy charges." Thank you for the perspective and feedback. Beccaynr (talk) 07:33, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, WU seems like a good fit for context. Dohrn was, I believe, an unindicted co-conspirator, and all of them probably wished they had made 'the show' themselves (it's odd that the government just indicted men and no women, Anita Hoffman could easily have been sitting alongside her husband). It's good to have someone working on the template, and by putting my attention on it again I added Country Joe McDonald (should have done so long ago). That Dustin Hoffman appearance interests me now, I'll google to see if a major media source reported on his visit to the courtroom and the defendants (after the days court session I saw him in one of the side rooms talking and yucking it up with Abbie Hoffman, Rubin, and some of the others). It's enjoyable rambling about this stuff, let me know if you mind me coming by here for rambling. I see on your user page that you are a relative of Lee Weiner, and I hope he is well and going strong, so maybe you can ask him about the Dustin Hoffman visit. I'll go look for a source now, and thanks again. Randy Kryn 10:52 22 October, 2014 (UTC)
It has taken awhile, but I finally have an answer and a source for your Dustin Hoffman question: "Jon Voight and Dustin Hoffman also visited the courtroom soon after Midnight Cowboy had opened. They deliberately sat in the back of the spectator section rather than out on the front benches where the guests who had been specially invited by the defendants, prosecutors, or the judge would sit. They didn't want to possibly distract the jurors in case they were recognized. In our brief conversations with them, they were reticent in their opinions about how they thought the trial was going or how it might end, but they were entranced by our efforts to resist the government in the courtroom." Weiner, Lee. (2020) Conspiracy To Riot, p. 83. Beccaynr (talk) 04:26, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Groucho Marx on the template? I couldn't find any mention of the Chicago 7 in his article. I see you added a source to the Weiner page that Marx was asked to testify and declined, probably not enough to list him as a supporter. And hello again, I hope all has been well. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:03, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, and that sounds good to me - I edited Groucho Marx from the template (pending further citation). Thank you for your feedback! Beccaynr (talk) 02:19, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Conspiracy: The Trial of the Chicago 8, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barry Miller. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

The Trial of the Chicago Seven

Hello. Why I certainly understand that critic's petspective (although I don't agree with it at all as Hampton was assasinated because of his politics and because the police felt threatened by him and Taylor was murdered because of sloppy trigger happy policing), We can't have every individual opinion, or even one because it opens that door, about connections in the film that aren't part of the movie. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 23:44, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

I've tried to clarify in my latest edit, and I do not think that my User page is an appropriate place for us to discuss what can and can not be included in the Reception section of the The Trial of the Chicago 7 page. If you would like to further discuss the issue, please take it up on that page so other members of the community can participate. Thank you. Beccaynr (talk) 00:29, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Seems like we worked it out. For future reference, editors are encouraged to message each other first to work out issues. If they can't come to a compromise then the talk page is a second step to get other opinions and hopefully reach a consensus. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 03:17, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, and I think the page is now more informative and synthesized after the addition of references that directly address the specific issue of the connection in the film. I thought the page's Talk page could be helpful because it had seemed to me like you were speaking to a broader policy issue, and that seemed beyond what we could resolve, but then I realized that the potential solution for the specific issue you raised was additional research and sources. I am glad for how it worked out, and I appreciate your contribution to the creative process. Beccaynr (talk) 04:18, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 04:20, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
We can't leave references like that. It doesn't follow Wikipedia standards and when it gets reviewed for GA they'll make us remove it. Hopefully you can format it into a note or add what's relevant in text. Let me know if you need help or have questions. Thank you. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 04:59, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean about a note, but the deletion you have twice made removes the quoted text from the Kagan article and completely removes the Robinson reference and quote. I tried to fix it by using the citation formats you added but it didn't work. The original way it was written is an attempt keep the Reception section concise while adding key details, and if you have a way to fix it so the content is presented in the way it was originally intended, that would be appreciated. Thank you Beccaynr (talk) 05:09, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
I see what you mean. I'll fix it. Watch what I do so you'll know for future reference. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 05:20, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
I think I see the direction you are taking, and I have an idea, but I don't want to step on your editing process... I'm going to try in a moment to add my idea, but I wanted to let you know, and thank you again, Beccaynr (talk) 05:36, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
The problem was that all the text you added didn't appear on the page. It appeared as a long, incorrectly formatted reference that didn't link to anything in the citation. It just read as a long paragraph. Again, not on the page itself but in the reference. This is because the ref tags were placed in the wrong places. It's a process and I had to learn this as well. I wasn't trying to edit the content. I was trying to fix the reference and when I understood that you meant it to appear on the page I did that as well. It was extra confusing to me because of the way the grammar was structured and the way the references were formatted and because they appeared in the last paragraph. I thought maybe you were going for an in text note but then I just understood that you misplaced the tags. Always look at the page after you edit something. This way you would know what you had added did not appear as text, but rather as a long note on the reference after clicking it but with no proper link. Thank you. I hope you're understanding this better. Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 14:34, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:47, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Wombat

Hi, I saw the note on your userpage about unsuccessfuly trying to insert a picture of a wombat, so I've been bold and done this for you – I hope you like it (if you don't, you can of course just undo the edit. You can change the size by modifying the middle parameter, e.g. by setting it to 500px if you want the image to be a little smaller. Blablubbs (talk • contribs) 22:00, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you thank you thank you so much!!!!!!!! Beccaynr (talk) 22:09, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Reply

Hello. I just wanted to let you know I really appreciate the Barnstar. It means a lot and I'm happy that you have felt encouraged by me. Keep up the good work! Samurai Kung fu Cowboy (talk) 16:57, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

That Barnstar is a much more precise recognition of your work than the kitten I was initially thinking about adding to your page - I've also been learning how to use the citation templates and cleaning up various pages I've previously worked on, and I very much appreciate your encouragement on continuing my learning process. Thank you again! Beccaynr (talk) 21:09, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

December 2020

Information icon Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you may have added public domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Chicago Seven. You are welcome to import appropriate public domain content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 22:07, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you - the line flagged on the article currently has four references that I plan to do more to synthesize - I am trying to find a way to clearly describe the names of the attorneys involved and concisely describe what happened. Thank you again for your note and for the links to Wikipedia policies and resources. Beccaynr (talk) 22:30, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
For your full and detailed work in revamping and improving the Chicago Seven page Mayor Daley and the gang over at the first precinct would give you an in-house going over and a few light taps on the head to "teach ya the rules". Nice work, a much improved article, and what happens when a good editor steps up. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:00, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you!!! My work on the Chicago Seven page is also helping improve my awareness and understanding of Wikipedia policies and practices, and some of my editing reflects that learning process as it has been happening in real time. What an adventure! And now a barnstar! Thank you again!!! Beccaynr (talk) 22:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Jane Musoke-Nteyafas for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jane Musoke-Nteyafas, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane Musoke-Nteyafas (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Mika Tosca

I just wanted to apologize that I didn't revert the re-addition of the MOS:DEADNAME at Mika Tosca. In the cloud of edits, I didn't notice that it had been put back! While I do think that there are reasonable arguments both ways, it should without a doubt stay out of the article until there's consensus (and probably it would be wise to wait on the AfD). Russ Woodroofe (talk) 19:14, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for saying so, I appreciate it. I have never previously addressed this issue on Wikipedia, and I have been interpreting MOS:DEADNAME as seeming to support a default in favor of privacy unless there is obvious notability under the past name (as described in the policy examples) or until there is a consensus about past name notability (and I think your point about waiting on the AfD is indeed wise). Thanks again, Beccaynr (talk) 20:12, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Justin Brummer (January 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Hatchens were:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Hatchens (talk) 06:47, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Teahouse logo
Hello, Beccaynr! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Hatchens (talk) 06:47, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Ark Invest

Hello User:Beccaynr, thank you for the useful additions you made to the article Catherine D. Wood. I created a article about her firm Ark Invest a few days ago. Unfortunately, it is now in the deletion discussion. I find this unjustified because this article clearly proves relevance with references to Bloomberg, CNBC etc.. I would be happy if you would support the retention of this article under Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ark Invest. Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afus199620 (talk) 13:12, 22 January 2021‎ (UTC)

Hi @Afus199620: you may want to consider the Article Rescue Squadron – Rescue list for assistance. I am concerned that your message to me does not appear to be in compliance with WP:CANVASS, including because you seem to be asking for my support with retention of the article instead of presenting the AfD discussion in a neutral manner. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 18:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, I was not aware that WP:CANVASS existed. I will try Article Rescue Squadron – Rescue list. Thank you.--Afus199620 (talk) 20:06, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your work on Gorman and "The Hill We Climb". I've credited you on Template:Did you know nominations/The Hill We Climb. Cheers, Eddie891 Talk Work 18:45, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

@Eddie891: Thank you very much, and for all of your work. That was the first time I have ever worked on such rapidly-evolving pages, and it has been quite a learning experience. Apologies for my delayed reply while I was mostly off site. Beccaynr (talk) 01:09, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Book Cover - Conspiracy To Riot, The Life and Times of One of The Chicago 7 by Lee Weiner.jpeg

Thank you for uploading File:Book Cover - Conspiracy To Riot, The Life and Times of One of The Chicago 7 by Lee Weiner.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:

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) 01:00, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Book Cover - Conspiracy To Riot, The Life and Times of One of The Chicago 7 by Lee Weiner.jpeg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Book Cover - Conspiracy To Riot, The Life and Times of One of The Chicago 7 by Lee Weiner.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:27, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Book cover, The Conspiracy, The Chicago 8 Speak Out, Dell 1969.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Book cover, The Conspiracy, The Chicago 8 Speak Out, Dell 1969.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:28, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lee Weiner 2020.jpeg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lee Weiner 2020.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:36, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lee Weiner, outside Federal Building in Chicago during conspiracy trial, Feb 11 1970.jpeg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lee Weiner, outside Federal Building in Chicago during conspiracy trial, Feb 11 1970.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:37, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sharon Avery and Lee Weiner, ca. 1970 Make a New Years Revolution, Kids.jpeg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sharon Avery and Lee Weiner, ca. 1970 Make a New Years Revolution, Kids.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:55, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
For improving Sheila Elizabeth Whitton and recusing it from deletion, here's a barnstar. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 00:30, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! I have some ideas for additional contributions to the article and I am glad it has been kept! Beccaynr (talk) 01:25, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

DYK for The Hill We Climb

On 11 February 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Hill We Climb, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after Amanda Gorman recited the poem "The Hill We Climb" at the inauguration of US president Joe Biden, she gained Twitter followers at a faster rate than the president? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Hill We Climb. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, The Hill We Climb), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Good work!

I just saw Gabrielle Diana was kept after the AfD. Good job on working on that article and contributing to getting it kept. HEY definitely applied! Keep up the good work - ideally we’ll cross paths again and work on another article together! —Kbabej (talk) 03:27, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I was just about to leave you a message on your Talk page, to thank you for taking the lead on revising and expanding the article! It was great working with you, and I look forward to working with you again in the future. Also, while you were continuing to update the article and rescue sources, I went ahead and added it to the Article Rescue Squadron Hall of Fame. Cheers, Beccaynr (talk) 03:36, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 16

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Disha Ravi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:37, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Walker Report, Rights in Conflict, 1968 Signet paperback cover.jpeg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Walker Report, Rights in Conflict, 1968 Signet paperback cover.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:17, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Beccaynr reported by User:TrangaBellam (Result: ). Thank you. TrangaBellam (talk) 20:42, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for withdrawing the report. Beccaynr (talk) 02:16, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Beccaynr/Archives/2021/February&oldid=1045281467"