| Revision as of 21:14, 2 March 2012 editNoformation (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers7,981 edits →Story← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 08:28, 23 January 2024 edit undo2603:6081:78f0:7410:c9b:590:c473:bda (talk)No edit summary | ||
| (539 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Not around|3=June 2021}} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 250K | |maxarchivesize = 250K | ||
| |counter = |
|counter = 10 | ||
| |algo = old(7d) | |algo = old(7d) | ||
| |archive = User talk:WLU/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = User talk:WLU/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| Line 10: | Line 11: | ||
| |- | |- | ||
| |align = "center" bgcolor= indigo| If I judge it requires discretion, I'll contact you. This is tremendously one-sided. I assure you, I feel terrible about it. Really I do. | |align = "center" bgcolor= indigo| If I judge it requires discretion, I'll contact you. This is tremendously one-sided. I assure you, I feel terrible about it. Really I do. | ||
| |- | |||
| |align="center" bgcolor= red|'''Note that my contributions are down a lot these days, I'm busy with other stuff, but otherwise fine. Also note that for some reason I'm not getting e-mail alerts when this page is edited, so for important issues please send me an e-mail directly.''' | |||
| |} | |} | ||
| Line 25: | Line 28: | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | |||
| *]}} | |||
| == Precious anniversary == | |||
| *] | |||
| {{User QAIbox | |||
| * ] | |||
| | title = Three years ago ... | |||
| * ]}} | |||
| | image = Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg | |||
| | image_upright = 0.5 | |||
| == Editing biographies during content disputes == | |||
| | bold = fringe topics | |||
| | normal = ... you were recipient<br /> no. ''']''' of ],<br /> a prize of QAI! | |||
| Hi there-- I have some concerns that you began negatively editing the biography about me here during a content dispute at the paraphilia article. The negative content you added has also been added by an editor with whom you often collaborate and agree , though it was later removed by others per WP:UNDUE and other guidelines. The same editor removed my academic credentials using a different account and removed my primary occupation, among other negative changes, despite that information being easily sourced (''e.g.'' ). In the interest of transparency, can you elaborate on that edit, its timing, and how that material came to your attention? My bio has been edited in a manner I consider punitive by other editors who have disagreed with me here or elsewhere. Many have been blocked. In the interest of NPOV, I have published a couple of responses I'd like to bring to your attention that I believe merit inclusion if we are to have such a one-sided attack included: | |||
| }} | |||
| *James, Andrea (2008) National Women's Studies Association conference. (the author of the paper you added unsuccessfully appealed to the NWSA president to suppress this entire panel.) | |||
| It's five years now! --] (]) 06:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC) | |||
| *James, Andrea (2006). ''Gender Medicine'', 3:56 ISSN 15508579 | |||
| Also in the interest of transparency, would you be willing to discuss your personal and/or professional connection to sex and sexuality issues? While you are under no obligation to do so, I find that most people who share your point of view have connections to the topic, and that some have a significant conflict of interest, like the ] editor with whom you have been working. I agree with your statements about transparency in general and back-channel communication in particular, especially if there is a professional connection to a topic. Thanks. ] (]) 15:46, 16 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :I added a very brief, neutral summary of an extremely lengthy article discussing a significant controversy of which ] was a part. My actual text included no analysis, only noting that an article existed and addressed her role in the publication and criticism of the ''TMWWBQ''. It was not done at the behest or request of James Cantor; I believe I added Drege's article to several wikipedia pages on the same day because it was unarguably reliable, unarguably relevant, and had the added advantage of being free and full-access. I don't consider it "negative editing" to point out a significant, reliable source that discusses a topic. I was unaware of James Cantor's earlier addition of the information, I merely saw a gap that seemed to require filling. I don't consider this single sentence fragment to be undue weight. Though I do not have time to read James' responses to the Drege article, I will attempt to do so in the near future; based on how I normally handle issues like this, I will probably include a similarly brief and neutral statement indicating Andrea James has replied on her website without significantly summarizing any content. | |||
| :I am deliberately separating the article's subject (]) from you as an editor ({{user|Jokestress}}) as editors are not reliable sources. | |||
| :I have no personal or professional connection to sex or sexuality issues, it is one of many topics that I edit because I see sources lacking, citation templates and citation information missing and I am interested in the topic. | |||
| ⚫ | : |
||
| ::Thanks for the reply. I don't believe the timing of your edit is merely coincidental, but I'm hoping we can resolve this without involving others. Your response to the appropriateness of the diffs I provided above will be a good indicator of your intent re NPOV. I'll wait a bit to see what additional edit(s) you make before next steps. ] (]) 17:16, 16 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::Honestly, I don't feel the need to defend my edit according to NPOV. Neutrality is not determined by who made the edit, it is determined by it's content. I see no issue with the content, and no reason to link this to any other editor's motivation. If it is necessary to discuss ''my'' motivation - there's not much to say. Blanchard, his typology theory and ''TMWWBQ'' are all linked by their common relationship to Drege. I made a series of edits to the pages because it's a wiki and there are a lot of interesting links. As an editor, if I click on a link, see incomplete citations and see gaps where I know there are citations that could be used to verify information - I fill those gaps. | |||
| ⚫ | ::: |
||
| ::::I don't believe you have demonstrated any "transphobia," and I don't believe off-wiki communication is indication of an "inappropriate relationship." The timing of your edit raises a question of neutrality, though, and I agree there is a lot of interesting information not given due weight on Misplaced Pages. I've supplied some above. As I said, I'll wait to see in this instance what actions you take now that you have been made aware of the concerns I have about the timing and how your edit appears to me. Your response will determine my response; until then I am assuming good faith while expressing my concern. ] (]) 18:13, 16 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | :::: |
||
| ::::::I feel you've had enough time to respond, so I've posted at the NPOV noticeboard. ] (]) 20:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Tendentious editing == | |||
| Yes, I know one get both blocked or banned for TE, but unless you have some really good proof of someone being guilty of it, ]. I'm sorry they give you such a hard time on the acupuncture page. You're doing a very good job, there. Cheers, --] (]) 06:46, 20 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Disambiguation link notification == | |||
| Hi. When you recently edited ], you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ] (] | ]). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. <small>Read the ]{{*}} Join us at the ].</small> | |||
| It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these ]. Thanks, ] (]) 11:01, 22 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Why title change in ] talk page? == | |||
| You've turned it from a descriptive title into an almost meaningless title. --] (]) 04:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ... and six! --] (]) 07:32, 5 January 2019 (UTC) | |||
| ::It gives essentially the same content (link to the article) but there's now a lot more room in the edit summary bar to write things. But change it back, I don't really care. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 13:00, 23 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ... and seven --] (]) 06:41, 5 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| == Username == | |||
| == Ritual Abuse == | |||
| Hello. Your username suggests you have an official connection with Wilfrid Laurier University in Ontario, Canada. Your idiosyncratic communication style and edit patterns also suggest a connection with this school and the province in which it is located. I am happy to provide diffs off-wiki if you wish. I have concerns that your username suggests you are an official representative of that institution, and as such, it may violate our ]. Accounts that purport to represent an entire group or company are not permitted. Can you expand on how you are personally or professionally connected with this school, and if you are connected, will you consider changing your username? I prefer to conduct these discussions on-wiki, but I am happy to take this off-wiki in the interest of your privacy. ] (]) 09:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :My user name is actually my initials, I have never represented myself as having any relationship to that institution, and I don't know if I've ever even edited the Wilfrid Laurier page. Also, be aware that this sort of comment really looks like a combination of ] and a mild, barely even a hint of a threat, that you might try to figure out my real-life identity and do something about it. I'm willing to ] that this is not the intent of the post, but frankly when you completely fail to provide any diffs suggesting any sort of actually problematic edits (particularly when I've never, ever intimated on any level that I in any way represent the actual institution), it's a little hard. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 13:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks for the reply. As I said, I am happy to provide diffs off-wiki. Also as I said, I didn't include them because they do include identifying information. However, since you say your connection to WLU is merely a coincidence, I will take you at your word and consider this resolved. ] (]) 18:26, 23 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Dear WLU, | |||
| == This discussion may interest you == | |||
| is my assumption correct that your of the opinion that faith based abuse doesn't occur? And why exactly would you come to that conclusion given the number of media reports, police investigations and court cases? As described in ] this type of abuse occurs in many communities. Subsets of the Nigerian community for example. I would just be very interested as to why it is that you want to present the topic in that manner. I would be very interested in talking to you or communicating via e-mail on this topic. Let me know if that would be of interest.--'''] ]''' 09:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| I did also link the article ] for disambiguation in the article Ritual abuse, that you wrote 68 % of.--'''] ]''' 09:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :I have no opinion on faith-based abuse. The satanic ritual abuse moral panic was a moral panic, and the few "real" cases were people dressing up in robes while raping children - not an organized satanic cult. In other words, the "ritual" aspects were secondary to the rape. | |||
| ⚫ | :I am not interested in communicating on this further. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 13:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC) | ||
| ::It's a bit premature to say ''welcome back'' but, hey, I have to work with I've got, so '''welcome back!''' ] (]) 23:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | ::::Definitely not "welcome back", which is a pity. For wikipedia. Because I'm amazing. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC) | ||
| ::: It wasn't my intention to emphasise the "ritual" aspect of this. From what I understand mostly this has nothing to do with any kind of faith but rather with organised crime and power. However when it does occur that groups get to gather and in organised ways rape, torture and kill children and adults then the victims (if they survive) are often not believed because people find the article on ritual abuse and come to the conclusion that everything is made up. This is absolutely not fair and horrible for the victims and makes it hard to stop these crimes from going on... That is all I wanted to say. I would really like to collaborate on having an article next to satanic ritual abuse that described actual cases of extreme organised sexual absue, for which much evidence can be found in different countries and cultures from all over the world. I'll if I'll find someone else to work on that with then...--'''] ]''' 17:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC) | |||
| ]. Also, the discussion Sandy links to at the end of her opening comment. --] (]) 01:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::::My concern is that, while the ritual abuse moral panic is a distinct "thing", a social phenomena that is written about in a coherent manner in the scholarly literature. The ] page, in addition to its capitalization problems, seems to trip over two aspects of ], specifically ] and ]. As for being original research, a quick skim of the references, for instance, seem to be closer to the ] page than anything else (McFadyen 1993, Richardson, 2015, and Scott, 2001 are, from my recall, about the satanic ritual abuse moral panic, though from an uncritical believer perspective) and would likely be better placed there. The rest is just kind of a list of cultural practices that have no real link to each other. Are the lip plates of the Mursi tribe actually a form of "ritual child abuse"? Certainly tattooing young girls in the Apatani tribe so they would not be abducted doesn't strike me as even close to "ritual" abuse. And the definition of "abuse" is very culturally determined, since within a specific cultural context it might be seen as abusive to '''not''' give a child ritual tattoos, lip extenders, and neck rings. While I personally consider such practices distasteful, within the culture it's considered beautifying. Breast flattening is another example where it causes harm, but is done to preserve chastity. Where is the "ritual"? An overall comment or question would be, where is the ] that labels these things to be "ritual child abuse" rather than "cosmetic mutilation"? Right now it seems like it is the wikipedia editors who are putting these items into a bucket, when it should be the ''sources'' that do so. | |||
| ::::And where do dowries come into it? Where is the ritual? Dowries are at least an economic issue more than they would seem to be a ritual practice. Why bring up fire-related deaths? | |||
| ⚫ | ::::Overall the article strikes me as extremely problematic and based more on the beliefs of the editors writing the page rather than the consensus, or even disagreement, of relevant scholars. I don't see why there should be a page where all of these items are listed in a hodge-podge, rather than the information now found on the page simply being part of a section in a main article. ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC) | ||
| == Nomination of ] for deletion == | |||
| <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 ]. | |||
| 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. | |||
| == ANI on Kuliukas == | |||
| 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.<!-- Template:afd notice --> ] (]) 02:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| I've filed an ANI report on Kuliukas. Please feel free to expand or clarify if you wish. Thanks. ] (]) 17:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Signed and awaiting your comment. Thanks. ] (]) 17:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Currently drafting, you're slowing me down :) ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 17:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == |
== Precious anniversary == | ||
| {{User QAIbox/auto|years=Nine}} --] (]) 08:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC) | |||
| ==Orphaned non-free image File:Michelle Remembers.jpg== | |||
| ] Thanks for uploading ''']'''. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a ]. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages (see ]). | |||
| Note that any non-free images not used in any '''articles''' will be deleted after seven days, as described in ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-orphaned fair use-notice --> --] (]) 17:24, 6 April 2023 (UTC) | |||
| What's the deal with you and ]? Is s/he actually involved in the BLP dispute or just wikistalking you? Something that needs to be dealt with at AN/I? It seems personal and obsessive. I also checked his tp archives and found a lot of strange responses to what seem to be innocuous posts from you (e.g. about being the "better wikipedian"). ] <font color="black"><sup>]</sup></font> 20:13, 2 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Bittergrey is a he as far as I know. | |||
| :The history of it all starts ], but the real guts of it are found at ] and it's archives (starting at archive 3). Other flashpoints are ] (note that the paraphilic infantilism discussion started ''before'' outsaurus.com), ] and if you really, really want a headache, you can read ], ], ] and ], all ongoing simultaneously, and the latter three on the same page. | |||
| :So there's a bit of wikistalking (on both sides) but Bittergrey has a habit of continuously bringing up my motivation, any past action he considers in any way questionable (to an absurd degree) and completely failing to ever recognize past consensus or editor improvements (for instance, note the dates of some of the edits brought up ], and my comment ]. I keep getting annoyed and starting lists of all the accusations, but I hate (and often find unproductive) RFC/U, WQA, AN, ANI and related editor-assessing venues. I basically haven't been cheesed off enough to climb the mountain that is trying to resolve stuff like this. Doesn't help that I can't stop beating dead horses. As you can see if you read the RSN/FTN discussion, there's a lot, a LOT, of repetition - on BG's part because...I don't know why, and on my part because he keeps repeating the same essentially incorrect information. If someone points out that I'm wrong, I feel the need to both admit it (i.e. ) and let it drop. Despite repeating the same point many, many times (such as "the DSM does not discuss paraphilic infantilism, there is a pretty clear consensus on the topic" see ] and ]) he keeps citing it as if it did (i.e. ). | |||
| :Yes, quite personal and obsessive. I can't say it's only one-way either, but I don't think the lion's share of the fault lies with me. A thumbnail's sketch can be found on my user page (search for "shiny dollar"). ] <small>] ] Misplaced Pages's rules:</small>]/] 20:44, 2 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::Do you think an interaction ban would be beneficial? I appreciate that you can admit fault in the matter but from what I've read (so far) I haven't seen you do anything egregiously rude or bad; at least on his talk page you've been as civil as can be expected. An RFC/U might also be an option. Honestly I probably have a shorter fuse than most editors when it comes to snarky and condescending responses, but at the end of the day I guess we have to remember that we're all just talking monkeys on an organic spaceship flying through the universe :). ] <font color="black"><sup>]</sup></font> 21:14, 2 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 08:28, 23 January 2024
 | This user may have left Misplaced Pages. WLU has not edited Misplaced Pages since June 2021. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else. |
| Please note that I usually don't do e-mail; if it's about wikipedia use my talk page. |
| If I judge it requires discretion, I'll contact you. This is tremendously one-sided. I assure you, I feel terrible about it. Really I do. |
| Note that my contributions are down a lot these days, I'm busy with other stuff, but otherwise fine. Also note that for some reason I'm not getting e-mail alerts when this page is edited, so for important issues please send me an e-mail directly. |
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Precious anniversary
 | |
| fringe topics | |
|---|---|
| ... you were recipient no. 356 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
It's five years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:35, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
... and six! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
... and seven --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:41, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Ritual Abuse
Dear WLU, is my assumption correct that your of the opinion that faith based abuse doesn't occur? And why exactly would you come to that conclusion given the number of media reports, police investigations and court cases? As described in Ritual Child Abuse this type of abuse occurs in many communities. Subsets of the Nigerian community for example. I would just be very interested as to why it is that you want to present the topic in that manner. I would be very interested in talking to you or communicating via e-mail on this topic. Let me know if that would be of interest.--Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 09:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC) I did also link the article Ritual child abuse for disambiguation in the article Ritual abuse, that you wrote 68 % of.--Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 09:36, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- I have no opinion on faith-based abuse. The satanic ritual abuse moral panic was a moral panic, and the few "real" cases were people dressing up in robes while raping children - not an organized satanic cult. In other words, the "ritual" aspects were secondary to the rape.
- I am not interested in communicating on this further. WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/complex 13:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- It's a bit premature to say welcome back but, hey, I have to work with I've got, so welcome back! Johnuniq (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- Definitely not "welcome back", which is a pity. For wikipedia. Because I'm amazing. WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/complex 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
- It's a bit premature to say welcome back but, hey, I have to work with I've got, so welcome back! Johnuniq (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
- It wasn't my intention to emphasise the "ritual" aspect of this. From what I understand mostly this has nothing to do with any kind of faith but rather with organised crime and power. However when it does occur that groups get to gather and in organised ways rape, torture and kill children and adults then the victims (if they survive) are often not believed because people find the article on ritual abuse and come to the conclusion that everything is made up. This is absolutely not fair and horrible for the victims and makes it hard to stop these crimes from going on... That is all I wanted to say. I would really like to collaborate on having an article next to satanic ritual abuse that described actual cases of extreme organised sexual absue, for which much evidence can be found in different countries and cultures from all over the world. I'll if I'll find someone else to work on that with then...--Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 17:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- My concern is that, while the ritual abuse moral panic is a distinct "thing", a social phenomena that is written about in a coherent manner in the scholarly literature. The Ritual Child Abuse page, in addition to its capitalization problems, seems to trip over two aspects of WP:NOT, specifically WP:OR and WP:NOTDIR. As for being original research, a quick skim of the references, for instance, seem to be closer to the satanic ritual abuse page than anything else (McFadyen 1993, Richardson, 2015, and Scott, 2001 are, from my recall, about the satanic ritual abuse moral panic, though from an uncritical believer perspective) and would likely be better placed there. The rest is just kind of a list of cultural practices that have no real link to each other. Are the lip plates of the Mursi tribe actually a form of "ritual child abuse"? Certainly tattooing young girls in the Apatani tribe so they would not be abducted doesn't strike me as even close to "ritual" abuse. And the definition of "abuse" is very culturally determined, since within a specific cultural context it might be seen as abusive to not give a child ritual tattoos, lip extenders, and neck rings. While I personally consider such practices distasteful, within the culture it's considered beautifying. Breast flattening is another example where it causes harm, but is done to preserve chastity. Where is the "ritual"? An overall comment or question would be, where is the reliable source that labels these things to be "ritual child abuse" rather than "cosmetic mutilation"? Right now it seems like it is the wikipedia editors who are putting these items into a bucket, when it should be the sources that do so.
- And where do dowries come into it? Where is the ritual? Dowries are at least an economic issue more than they would seem to be a ritual practice. Why bring up fire-related deaths?
- Overall the article strikes me as extremely problematic and based more on the beliefs of the editors writing the page rather than the consensus, or even disagreement, of relevant scholars. I don't see why there should be a page where all of these items are listed in a hodge-podge, rather than the information now found on the page simply being part of a section in a main article. WLU (t) (c) Misplaced Pages's rules:/complex 15:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
- It wasn't my intention to emphasise the "ritual" aspect of this. From what I understand mostly this has nothing to do with any kind of faith but rather with organised crime and power. However when it does occur that groups get to gather and in organised ways rape, torture and kill children and adults then the victims (if they survive) are often not believed because people find the article on ritual abuse and come to the conclusion that everything is made up. This is absolutely not fair and horrible for the victims and makes it hard to stop these crimes from going on... That is all I wanted to say. I would really like to collaborate on having an article next to satanic ritual abuse that described actual cases of extreme organised sexual absue, for which much evidence can be found in different countries and cultures from all over the world. I'll if I'll find someone else to work on that with then...--Sparrow (麻雀) 🐧 17:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of Mumps outbreaks in the 21st century for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mumps outbreaks in the 21st century 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/Mumps outbreaks in the 21st century 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. Velayinosu (talk) 02:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Precious anniversary
| |
| Nine years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Michelle Remembers.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Michelle Remembers.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. 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 Misplaced Pages (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) 17:24, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Categories: