User talk:David Warner

Welcome!

Hello, David Warner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, 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! JRawle (Talk) 18:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Château de Ferrières[edit]

That's an interesting page - well done. Giano | talk 17:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Occupation of the Channel Islands[edit]

Can you explain why you moved Occupation of the Channel Islands to the rather cumbersome German occupation of the Channel Islands in World War II ? The correct protocol if you want to rename and redirect a page is to post a comment on the discussion page explaining your rationale, and giving others the opportunity to discuss this. I propose to revert it to its original name until the correct process has been followed footie 07:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your explanation does not explain why you have not posted the suggestion on the talk page of the relevant article, or why such a long-winded name is necessary when there has only been one Occupation of the Channel Islands, and when all other articles have exactly the same format title (see List of military occupations). If you still insist that this is still a good idea, then are you going to go back and change all the links to the original page ? footie 19:14, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have the same reservation about the Occupation of Denmark, so I've restored this page to its usual name. In Denmark, this event is always referred to as Besættelsen (i.e. the Occupation), and 1940-45 is the only time in Danish history that the entire country has been occupied by a hostile power. In 1864, Prussia occupied the Jutland Peninisula and in 1659, Sweden occupied most of the county, but these events are always referred to by other names. If you think a general rename is in order, a vote should be set up on it, since this issue no doubt involves many more articles. Best regards. Valentinian ^(talk) 13:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Occupation of Norway by Nazi Germany[edit]

This was discussed at length on the talk page, which you should have read. Please revert. --Leifern 19:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I did it myself. Please refer to talk pages before making such moves. This was discussed at length and the title was the result of serious negotiations. --Leifern 19:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forbes list[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions to the Forbes magazine list of the The Twenty Most Influential Businessmen Of All Time article, but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing!

Well, the above is Wikipedia boilerplate, that doesn't really apply in this case.

FYI, as far as copyright goes, copying published lists can be very tricky. Some types of lists are very much fair game and some are absolutely right out. The deciding factor is creativity (or judgement) in either selecting the members of the list or in their arrangement. Mere hard work, no matter how difficult, doesn't create a copyright, but even a sliver of creativity does make it copyrighted. In this particular case, Forbes has a very strong case that the entire list is copyrighted (unless they got it from some public domain source themselves). If they used their knowledge and judgment to create the list, then we can't have it in Wikipedia. In other words, "Top 5 Tallest Presidents" is a list we can copy, but "(Some expert's) 5 Best Presidents" is a copyrighted list that we can't.

On the other hand, that someone has been so ranked by Forbes is a fact, and facts are not copyrightable, so we don't need to worry about pages that have a fact derived from the list on them. studerby 03:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC) studerby 03:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, one other thing. Since you didn't "cut and paste" the Forbes list, but merely transcribed their rankings, it may not seem to you like it's a "copy". However, courts have decided that reproducing the "heart of the work", no matter how small in relation to the original, is a copyriight violation, and in this case the "heart of the work" is the ranking of names. Another way of looking at is: does the Wikipedia list often serve as an effective replacement for an authorized copy of the list? If the answer is yes, it's a copyright violation. Sorry. studerby 04:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Sophie of Ligne[edit]

Princess Sophie of Ligne has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt this person might not be notable enough for an article. Please review Wikipedia:Notability (people) for the relevant guidelines. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the "prod" template, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod template, the article will not be deleted, but if an editor is still not satisfied that it meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. NickelShoe (Talk) 06:30, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Camandos-bookcover.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Camandos-bookcover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:33, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:RothschildGardens-bookcover.jpg[edit]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:RothschildGardens-bookcover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Gnomes-bookcover.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Gnomes-bookcover.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 16:29, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dining clubs[edit]

There is a one man campaign being waged against dining clubs one the grounds that they don't deserve articles. I see you've previously edited one such article, and was wondering if you'd care to lend your support at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dining_club ? Many thanks Grunners 18:30, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SassoonBookcover.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:SassoonBookcover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Charlote-LionelRothschild-bookcover.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Charlote-LionelRothschild-bookcover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bertha Clara von Rothschild[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Bertha Clara von Rothschild, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Jeepday (talk) 23:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Hello David Warner! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 940 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

David Lionel de Rothschild - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Leopold David de Rothschild - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Nathaniel Robert de Rothschild - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:33, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:NicolasBeaujon1785.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:NicolasBeaujon1785.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:51, 8 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:51, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Nathaniel Robert de Rothschild[edit]

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

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Joe Decker (talk) 14:19, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of David Lionel de Rothschild for deletion[edit]

The article David Lionel de Rothschild is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Lionel de Rothschild until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. J04n(talk page) 12:30, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gerome-CharlotteRothschild.gif listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Gerome-CharlotteRothschild.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:54, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:CharlottevovRothschild-Oppenheim.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:CharlottevovRothschild-Oppenheim.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:02, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Pargesa Holding for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pargesa Holding is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pargesa Holding until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

HighKing⁺⁺ 19:46, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]