User talk:Piersmasterson

Hello, "Piersmasterson" and welcome to Wikipedia. A few tips for you:

Peruse Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers and associated pages, such as
You can experiment in the Wikipedia:Sandbox.
Sign talk page entries with ~~~~, which is automatically converted to a name and date.
If you have any questions, see Wikipedia:Help, or you can a question at the Wikipedia:Help desk.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian.

-- Infrogmation 11:05, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Punctuation problems

I happened to be reading your stub article on Nigel Davenport when I observed a number of formatting problems, all caused by an irregular mix of straight and directed single-quote marks, most of which were clearly meant to italicize film titles. (I've fixed them all, but you might want to compare the current version with the way it looked before.) If you use a word processor like Microsoft Word that automatically converts straight quotes to directed ones, you might try pasting your text into a text editor and doing a global replace on those directed quotes to ensure the wiki markup works properly before copying it into a wiki edit window. (Usually, you can turn off directed quotes, but I imagine most folks don't want to do this just to make wiki editing easier.) Anyway, it's just a thought. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 22:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One more tip: please use Infrogmation's 3rd tip in the welcome message above and sign your talk-page posts with four tildes. The wiki software automatically converts them to your username (with a link to your user page) and a timestamp, which allows readers to see who wrote what. (This is only for talk pages; article edits should not be signed.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) 15:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ICA

I would be interested in knowing your source for the claim you made at ICA regarding the CIA. Ejgm 15:53, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, I'll look it up. Ejgm 17:07, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gabo

Nice work on Naum Gabo! ora 23:11, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for the message. I tagged it a whiel back as I came across the article (beign soemwhat of a fan) and spotetd the state it was in. Sadly I'm not that expert in the subject, but will go over it for clarity at least. No idea why he chose Gabo either, I'm sure i was told once but I can't recall. ora 12:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Allen

Hi! Thanks for your input on the article. Regarding your questions:

You're right that the Arts Council was criticised for not looking closely enough at the financial affairs of the House before making the grant. Allen should take some responsibility for this, as Secretary General, but remember that although she assisted in the assessment of the application, she was not a decision maker:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmcumeds/199i/cu0105.htm

My source for her surprise at the state of the House's finances is from her book, A House Divided. I would be happy for there to be a "she claims" and a reference!

I agree that the part about her succesfully steering the house through the refurbishment needs work!

The quotation you made from the report about her conduct, if you look closely, refers only to her actions in late April and early May 1997, the time at which the new appointment was being discussed between her and Lord Chadlington, not to her tenure as Chief Executive of the House.

I'd love to hear your thoughts! -- Con Dem^Talk 06:05, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More More Mary

Hi again Piers,

I was planning to reread A House Divided anyway, so I'll find the reference for the surprise, and see if there's anything on her version of why the exact financial situation was not known to her beforehand.

I suppose if your sources for her being approached before for the job two years previously are uncitable, they can't be included, which is a shame. Perhaps it says something about that in the book as well. Although it would be a pity to have too many quotes from the book, because it means that most of the article comes from one source! Perhaps the article should be clarified to reflect the exact meaning of the comments regarding her actions in the report.

Although there might be other questionable lottery decisions during her leadership, I expect that she was not specifically involved in them all. Perhaps these should be put into an expanded version of the Council article? Maybe with a mention in the Allen article.

The problem is, that although her actions from late April to early may were harshly criticised in the report, Allen did do good work at the Arts Council and at the House, and the Article might change to an extremely negative report. The fact is that, as detailed in the book (and i'm sure verifiable with other sources) she saved the House from bankruptcy on more than one occasion. I'd be pleased if some positive words about her work could be included as well as the negative, although it was the controversy that brought national attention (which is, of course, often the case.)

I'd be happy to help on other articles, but I'm not sure how useful I'd be - my knowledge is quite limited to this particular subject, rather than Arts funding in general. However, I do find it interesting, so wouldn't mind researching to make future articles better, or improve some existing ones!

looking forward to hearing your thoughts,

Con Dem^Talk 15:57, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Swingeing London .jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Swingeing London .jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Stan 04:31, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Blue Carpet.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Blue Carpet.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Hetar 07:40, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Gabo_fountain.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gabo_fountain.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Gabo_Head.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gabo_Head.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Uk london royalfestivalhall.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Uk london royalfestivalhall.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Hetar 23:55, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Apollo Pavilion.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Apollo Pavilion.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Hetar 19:01, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page Blanking

On 8-May, you blanked Steven Woolley. Blanking pages is generally considered a bad idea. I've reverted it to the previous version. If this was the result of a broken edit, you may wish to make the correct edits. If you believe the page should be deleted, please follow the deletion procedures. If you have questions, please let me know. Thanks! -- JLaTondre 02:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated from my talk page: I have taken care of it. You might want to check if I missed anything. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 02:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Contemporary Art

You might be interested in joining in this project. Tyrenius 11:22, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nicholas Serota

Thanks for drawing my attention. However, the deletion is perfectly justified, as it is unsubstantiated gossip, and I doubt if it can be given a verifiable reference. The whole article could do with some close attention, and more references, as there is only one in the whole article at the moment. Tyrenius 13:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:De Bijenkorf Construction 1954-1977.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:De Bijenkorf Construction 1954-1977.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Pasmore Kingston upon Thames Bus Canteen 1950.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Pasmore Kingston upon Thames Bus Canteen 1950.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

They've killed the List of famous failures in science and engineering! You Bastards!!

Mmx1 is taking the fight that I have over the F-14 and F-111 to the failure page, and he has nominated them for deletion. The wiki-thugs are all voting to delete the page. Mmx1 has reversed the F-14 page to state that it is not, and has never been designed as a maneuverable air superiority fighter, and is not accepting any contrary citations up to and including a F-14 test pilot, Janes Defence, and Aviation Week. He is apparently taking revenge against other pages. Please go to the deletion page and tell the administrators what is going on. Look at the patterns of MMx. He regular accuses others of gross misinformation and summarily reverts most edits as a self-appointed judge of all truth, but in fact should not be allowed this leeway. --matador300 10:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

McHale maniac

Someone keeps making changes to pages linked with John McHale and I saw you had reverted some. Its not just that they don't source but the language is very non-wiki. Can anything be done?Piersmasterson

All I've done has been reverting them at whining at the anon talk pages, having no effect. These days, though, I am without an internet connection, severely (or rather: completely and totally) limiting my ability to take care of that and other wiki things. You'll have to talk to someone else :/ --Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 16:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Victor Lewis-Smith

You asked for more biographic info on the guy. Well, it seems there's going to be a book - check the site (there seems to be a fight going on about what to include or not but I don't know anything about libel). Thought you'd interested, I was!

AfD Nomination: Bienvenida Buck

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but all Wikipedia articles must meet our criteria for inclusion (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Since it does not seem to me that Bienvenida Buck meets these criteria, I have started a discussion about whether this article should be kept or deleted.

Your opinion on whether this article meets the inclusion criteria is welcome. Please contribute to the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bienvenida Buck. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them.

Discussions such as these usually last five days. In the meantime, you are free to edit the content of the article. Please do not remove the "articles for deletion" template (the box at the top). When the discussion has concluded, an administrator will consider all comments and decide whether or not to delete the article. If you have good sources for the information in the article which satisfy WP:ATT and WP:BLP please add them to the article and note the fact in the deletion debate page. Thanks. Edison 20:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:The Citizen.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:The Citizen.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 19:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Hamilton-appealing2.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Hamilton-appealing2.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 05:04, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use disputed for Image:Pasmore Kingston upon Thames Bus Canteen 1950.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Pasmore Kingston upon Thames Bus Canteen 1950.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 02:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Wentworthshower.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Wentworthshower.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) 06:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Goodman.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Goodman.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) 23:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Piersmasterson! 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 710 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Norman Rosenthal - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Mary Allen - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
John Kasmin - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Pasmore Kingston upon Thames Bus Canteen 1950.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Pasmore Kingston upon Thames Bus Canteen 1950.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Hockney kasmin.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Hockney kasmin.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 page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 01:00, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Vorticists.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Vorticists.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:48, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Argent Group

The article Argent Group has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no specific references about the group

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 06:40, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Robot Wars for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Robot Wars 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/The Robot Wars 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.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:35, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Club X for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Club X 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/Club X (2nd nomination) 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.

InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 23:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]