| Revision as of 19:31, 6 October 2024 view sourceLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,725 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Fæ/2022) (bot← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 19:16, 27 December 2024 view source Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,293,725 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Fæ/2024) (bot | ||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| {{Off and On WikiBreak}} | {{Off and On WikiBreak}} | ||
| == Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
| ==Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Gillbert and Ellice Islands 1971.jpg== | |||
| <div class="afd-notice"> | |||
| ] | |||
| <div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0;">]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article ] is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to ] or whether it should be ]. | |||
| Thank you for uploading ''']'''. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Misplaced Pages may not meet the criteria required by ]. 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 ] is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an ]; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale. | |||
| The article will be discussed at ''']''' 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. | |||
| 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 ]. If you have any questions, please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-disputed fair use rationale-notice --> '''] ]''' 23:05, 14 March 2024 (UTC) | |||
| 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 until the discussion has finished.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> ] (]) 16:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | == Good article reassessment for ] == | ||
| ⚫ | ] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) |
||
| ⚫ | == Good article reassessment for ] == | ||
| ⚫ | ] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 22:45, 26 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 19:16, 27 December 2024
 Archives |
|
/2014 /2015 /2016 /2017 /2018 /2019 /2020 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
 | When I do reply it may be from a mobile phone or by email.  Due to routinely using public wifi, my edits will normally be via ToR to avoid browser hijacking. |
 | Fæ is busy and is going to be on Misplaced Pages in off-and-on doses, and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
Nomination of Clare Dimyon for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Clare Dimyon is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Clare Dimyon 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 until the discussion has finished.Ynsfial (talk) 16:17, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for British Library
British Library has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 22:45, 26 December 2024 (UTC)