User talk:Happyman22/archive1

Chicago Bears

I'd say the best thing to do would be to merge the stadium/ownership information into the history sections. Then again, the Bears' have been around nearly twice as long as the Pats, with many more peaks, valeys, and key changes. I do like the bonus info on the cheerleaders and popular culture, which should really help the article meet the comprehensiveness standard. Nevertheless, I highly recommend merging the business/stadium highlights into the history to keep it succinct and chronological. — Deckiller 22:39, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Virginia mccaskey.gifThanks for uploading Image:Virginia mccaskey.gif. The image description 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 fair use images 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:10, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Section merging

• Featured article criteria are often bended to a user's preferences (read: length of plot sections in video game FAs), which often changes as the time goes on. Thus, what is community consensus now may not have been community consensus in a past time. Granted, this is absolutely no reason to remove or review past FAs; it's just a typical wikibug. — Deckiller 02:52, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE:I disagree to your assumption with the Bears article

I believe I have raised other issues as well as the merging of those sections. Wikipedia's False Prophet holla at me petition 04:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Honeybears.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Honeybears.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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 fair use images 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. —Bkell (talk) 00:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding more information to the image description page. However, the image is still lacking a rationale explaining why its use on Wikipedia should be considered fair use. If you need help or have any questions, please let me know. —Bkell (talk) 04:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is the proper rationale I should give to an image that tells it is fair use. Everything I have read about it seems confusing? --Happyman22 15:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are four factors which must be considered for a fair-use claim under United States copyright law:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Basically, you need to establish the following claims:

• The use must not attempt to "supersede the objects" of the original but rather be educational or critical.
• The less of the original that is used in relation to the whole the more likely that use is fair, though the importance of the specific portion is also considered (as quoting the most important part may attempt to "supersede" the original).
• The use must not infringe on the copyright owner's ability to exploit his original work (for instance, by acting as a direct market substitute for the original work), though not through criticism or parody.

Additionally, you must make sure that the image satisfies all ten requirements of the Wikipedia fair use policy. Go through these requirements one by one. Give an explanation for any of them that you think need justification. In particular, you will need to explain why no free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information (the first requirement), and why the image contributes significantly to the article and does not serve a purely decorative purpose (the eighth requirement).

I personally think that a fair-use claim for this image is shaky, because the photograph was apparently taken to be used as art for a Kodak box, and we are not using the image to comment on this box art. (One of the fair use counterexamples is "an image of a magazine cover, used only to illustrate the article on the person whose photograph is on the cover." This seems to be similar: an image of the packaging of a commercial product, used only to illustrate the article on the persons whose photograph is on the box.) In addition, this image has a very large and distracting watermark that says "www.BearsHistory.com", which lessens the suitability of the image for Wikipedia. You will need to write your fair-use rationale in such a way that it will convince skeptics like me that the use of this image on Wikipedia falls under fair use and is not simply a copyright violation. Let me know if you need help or have any more questions. —Bkell (talk) 16:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Eastern OrthodoxyHi there! I've noticed that you've edited articles pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wanted to extend an invitation to you to join the WikiProject dedicated to organizing and improving articles on the subject, which can be found at: WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This WikiProject was begun because a need was perceived to raise the level of quality of articles on Wikipedia which deal with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

You can find information on the project page about the WikiProject, as well as how to join and how to indicate that you are a member of the project. Additionally, you may be interested in helping out with our collaboration of the month. I hope you'll consider joining and thank you for your contributions thus far! —A.S. Damick ^{talk contribs} 18:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Bears

Unspecified source for Image:Serb-ch.gifThanks for uploading Image:Serb-ch.gif. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may 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. Jkelly 00:53, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Serbs

Chicago Bears template

Done --Coasttocoast 00:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Serb-ch.gifThanks for uploading Image:Serb-ch.gif. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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 18:54, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Bear Stubs

wikiproject

BearsStubHi - it has come to our notice that you have recently created a new stub type. As it clearly states at WP:STUB, at the top of most stub categories, on the template page for new Wikiprojects and in many other places on Wikipedia, new stub types should be proposed prior to creation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, in order to check whether the new stub type is already covered by existing stub types, whether it is named according to stub naming guidelines, whether it reaches the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, whether it crosses existing stub type hierarchies, and whether better use could be made of a WikiProject-specific talk page template.

In the case of your new stub type, it is not named according to stub naming guidelines, it does not reach the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, it is not correctly formed, and is of a type which would be unlikely to gain any support for a stub split (sportspeople change teams regularly, so this would result in a lot of unnecessary multiple-stubbing). Your new stub type has been proposed for deletion at WP:SFD. And please, in future, propose new stub types first! Grutness...wha? 02:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

/* Participants */ Chicago Bears

Chicago Bears seasons stubs

AFL-NFL Championships

I would like to see confirmation that "the NFL record book" doesn't count league championships for AFL or NFL champions who won the Super Bowl. Comparing this to baseball, did the St. Louis Cardinals win the American Baseball League Championship last year, or doesn't it count, because they won the World Series?

The page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_NFL_Championships gives a column for NFL championships and a column for AFL championships. Did the Jets win zero AFL championships? The Texans/Chiefs won three AFL championships; in 1962, 1966 AND 1969, and a World Championship in 1969. There were ten AFL championship games. Add up the column on that page, and you only get eight. Similarly, the sum of the NFL championships is incorrect. Listing all the league championships is less confusing than NOT listing them, and is historically correct, which your table is not.

I suggest you simply properly record the AFL and NFL championships, then change footnote [1} to read: "From the 1933 through the 1969 season, the NFL played a league championship game. Its champions are recorded above. From the 1960 through the 1969 season, the AFL played a league championship game. Its champions are also recorded above. From 1966 through 1969, the champions of each league played each other, as in Baseball, and the winner was the World Champion. Since 1970, there has only been one major pro football league, so the Super Bowl winner is the NFL champion." Any comments, please e-mail me at RemembertheAFL@aol.com SugnuSicilianu

More AFL-NFL Championships

Thanks. The table now reflects actual fact. SugnuSicilianu

Orphaned fair use image (Image:CHI 354.gif)Thanks for uploading Image:CHI 354.gif. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 02:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for edit

Lawrence Taylor

St. Louis Rams seasons

Montenegrins

Interest?Why do you all of a sudden have interest in Serbs?

I'm just asking out of curiosity... --PaxEquilibrium 15:07, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm just askin'. ;) --PaxEquilibrium 21:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bears team template

Technically, by your logic, the franchise link shouldn't be there too, because it leads to everything else on the template. Do you see my point? You have to draw the line somewhere between keeping things two/three levels deep. The Quarterbacks article is separate and considered to be on the level of a players, history, logos/uniforms, or seasons article of teams. As far as the Decatur Staleys goes, it would be inappropriate to just label the template the Chicago Bears. Not everything on the template (most notably the history and players articles) falls under the heading "Chicago Bears." Having Boston/New England Patriots or Decatur Staleys/Chicago Bears makes the template more all-encompassing and appropriate to its material. As far as some of the links on there, how does making it bold signify to the reader that that's the current stadium? They're in chronological order - there's no need to add superfluous bold text. Brian's Song and The Super Bowl Shuffle are both titles of articles - on the same exact level as Chicago Bears or George Halas (not material-wise, of course, but rather in the fact that they're all articles, and the former are no less articles than the latter). The appropriate quotes or italicized text will be contained within the interior titles of the articles and don't have to be duplicated whenever that article is linked. As far as NFL championship appearances go, those can really start to pile up, especially with a storied franchise like the Bears. Instead of adding a teams' AAFC or AFL or pre-merger NFL championship appearances, the most concise method seems to be just Super Bowl appearances - what links every modern NFL team together. Training camp starts for the Pats in 33 days. Can't wait. :D Pats1 01:42, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course there's going to be some cases like the Packers or Cardinals where the team had a bunch of different names. No system is going to be perfect. But an "other team names" section is just a rehash of the main article and mostly wasted space - having the main team names as a header is a good compromise. Sounds good with the QB page - make sure to de-link the main Bears article then, too. Again, with the NFL/AFL/AAFC championship appearances, we could go back to some 1919 match with the Providence Steam Roller or whatever. The NFL championships won are still on the template, in the league championships section. Only some teams have NFL championship game appearances, while some have AFL CG appearances, while still others have AAFC ones. However, almost every NFL team now has a Super Bowl appearance. It's something that can be standard throughout all team templates. I know you are proud about the Bears' pre-merger history, but introducing elements of it would open the door to introducing elements from every little league every team was a part of prior to the modern NFL. The Super Bowl is the championship game of the modern NFL. Honestly, whatever is done on the Arsenal page is not of my concern. The only common link is that they're part of English Wikipedia and they're a sports team. That's it. They're not American, they're not about American football, and most importantly, they're not a part of WP:NFL. Whatever their "football" project decides to do is independent of what WP:NFL decides to do. Pats1 02:18, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please participate

Kosovo: country debate

Hi again. It's probably a minor point, but there a discussion and vote going on at Talk:Kosovo#Kosovo:_terminology as to whether or not it's better to use Kosovo rather than Kosovan or Kosovar in the Wikipedia articles. Perhaps you have no interest, in which case sorry to bother you! DSuser 15:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Serbia logo.gif) Thanks for uploading Image:Serbia logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:09, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Serbia logo.gif) Thanks for uploading Image:Serbia logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FL Main page proposal

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CHI 362.gifThanks for uploading Image:CHI 362.gif. 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 23:35, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CHI 363.gifThanks for uploading Image:CHI 363.gif. 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 23:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Featured List of the Day Experiment

AfD nomination of Dallas Cowboys seasons

An article that you have been involved in editing, Dallas Cowboys seasons, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dallas Cowboys seasons. Thank you. Truthanado (talk) 17:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

This article has been redirected to Dallas Cowboys where similar information already exists. Please feel free to update the information in that article so that Wiki users don't have to look in two places to find the information. Truthanado (talk) 16:42, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:NFL team demo

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Constantinople seal.gifThanks for uploading Image:Constantinople seal.gif. 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) 05:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CHI 354.gifThanks for uploading Image:CHI 354.gif. 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) 06:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summaries

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you.

Current FLC

Speedy deletion of Template:BearstitlesA tag has been placed on Template:Bearstitles 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) 01:33, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:200px-PatrijarhDimitrijePavlovic.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:200px-PatrijarhDimitrijePavlovic.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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Undeath (talk) 04:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Serb portal/Serb Music

Speedy deletion of Template:Chicago Bears timelineA tag has been placed on Template:Chicago Bears timeline 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) 22:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Varnava Rosic.jpg

Hello, I see that you have a number of images you uploaded copied from the Serbian wikipedia. Instead of trying to do this cross-wiki copying, I think you should upload them to Commons and then let everyone have access to them. Some of those images would probably be useful in other wikipedias as well. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

question about chicago bears template

WP:LOTD/WP:LOTM

WP:CHICAGO

FLRC

I saw your comment on the FLRC discussion page. It will likely be delisted if you try those arguments. Standards get tighter over time. You have to clean up the article to retain the honor. Please give it a shot if you have the time. You will notice your article improve.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Bears seasons

Discussion about NFL season list names

Bears retired numbers

File permission problem with File:Patrijarh german.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Patrijarh german.jpg. 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-enwikimedia.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 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-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image 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 uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Vikentije Prodanov.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Vikentije Prodanov.jpg. 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-enwikimedia.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 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-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image 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 uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Patrijarh Gavrilo.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Patrijarh Gavrilo.jpg. 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-enwikimedia.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 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-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image 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 uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:00, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:St-mark.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:St-mark.jpg. 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-enwikimedia.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 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-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image 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 uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:25, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Bears FAR

Reviewer rights" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 15:31, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Pr99-1.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Pr99-1.jpg. 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-enwikimedia.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-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} 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. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 04:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Happyman22/archive1&oldid=1131502236"