I hope you like this place — I sure do — and want to
stay. Before getting too in-depth, you may want to read about the
Five pillars of Wikipedia and
simplified ruleset. If you need help on how to title new articles check out the
naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the
manual of style. If you need help look at
Wikipedia:Help and the
FAQ , plus if you can't find your answer there, check the
Village Pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the
Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the
Tutorial and
Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the
Community Portal. And if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on
my user talk page or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will be by to help you shortly.
If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{ GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{ cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{ PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.
If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.
If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:CentralJerseyMapFromChris1.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. CSDWarnBot ( talk) 01:31, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:CentralJerseyMapFromChris.jpg. 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. BJBot ( talk) 12:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
I want to get rid of that image. That image is not used in any articles. There is a clone image that is actually freely licensed (GNU). I simply checked the wrong box when I uploaded the image the first time.
Thanks for your past contributions to the article Central Jersey. I've placed a proposal on the article's talk page to remove the claims that there is controversy over whether the Raritan Valley in New Jersey exists. Please visit the page and register your support or opposition for the proposal. Thanks. -- Bryan H Bell ( talk) 04:50, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war according to the reverts you have made on
Central Jersey. Note that the
three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the
three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be
blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a
consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue
dispute resolution. --
Bryan H Bell (
talk)
01:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
In regards to this edit [3], please refrain from making personal attacks on other editors. Regardless of your problems with content, please remain civil. Thanks! Redrocket ( talk) 02:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Jps57 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I am contesting this block. The reversions occurred because one poster completely changed the opening while providing scant justification for his changes. He/She provided no justification or citations for the change. I repeatedly solicited reasons for the poster's changes. I never once told him/her that my version was absolutely correct. I only told him why I thought his intro was wrong. I am shocked that I am the one being blocked when the poster was the one who made unilateral changes with no support whatsoever. There is a lot of contention in the Central Jersey article because insecure posters come on and say what suits their agenda without providing support. I am more than willing to work with those who disagree with me, such as AlanSohn, because he offers his perspective. He doesn't just change the article for no reason or justification. I am being punished for being honest, for telling the truth about Central Jersey. Some people seem not to want to hear that, despite the fact that they have scant justification for their beliefs. The article is pretty airtight right now, with far more references than would normally appear in a regular article about a small region. I refuse to succumb to personal interests who come here for no reason other than to mollify their own insecurities. Jps57 ( talk) 15:00, 7 May 2008 (UTC)jps57
Decline reason:
None of this justifies edit warring, which is what you were doing. It really doesn't matter if you're wrong or right; and attacking other editors is not the way to get unblocked. Further, this isn't punishment; this is to stop you from edit warring. Agree to do so and you'll get unblocked immediately. -- jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 15:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
{{
unblock|Thanks for your message. I apologize for engaging in the edit war and promise to follow wiki's policies in the future. I am sorry about my actions that occurred in the heat of passion. However, you should know that I am deeply frustrated by what is going on the Central Jersey article. I think you will agree with me that wiki articles are only good if they offer clean analysis substantiated by facts/sources. Unfortunately, this does not appear to be happening in the Central Jersey article. None of this is an excuse for what I have done. I promise to refrain from edit warring in the future and to follow your policies to the letter.
Jps57 (
talk)
15:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)jps57}}
This still needs sources, even if you think it's uncontrovertible. - Revolving Bugbear 18:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Revolving Bugbear, when I made that statement about not challenging the historical analysis, I wasn't necessarily referring to you. I was referring to the people who randomly came onto the Central Jersey site to make bald statements that suited their personal agendas. I have sourced the section. But your insistence on them for every conceivable statement belies both academic standards and common sense. Your excuse about not going onto other sites (try California) to change their unsourced statements is simply an example of your SELECTIVE preference for sourcing in certain articles over others. You also misinterpret the word "start." If a farming community has some development, it doesn't mean that it's changed. "Start," then, means when the character of the community has undergone FUNDAMENTAL change. Again, your failure to even mention the 1960s acceleration is just an example of your bias. The point I'm trying to make here is that no one should pretend they're objective, even with sources. Everyone has an agenda. I have an agenda. I am trying to inform, to add as much as possible (even cultural references), to an article about a nebulous topic. A tactic used to defeat portions of the article not liked by certain users has been to insist on sourcing. That is a fair statement. Your failure to realize your own apprehensions about the article is baffling. Your assumption about the nature of sourcing just reinforces your unfamiliarly with the concept of research (though I can only say what's true for the financial and maybe the legal industries). Jps57 (talk) 19:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)jps57
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:CentralJerseyMapFromChris1.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
Sdrtirs (
talk)
11:30, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
You uploaded or restored , File:CentralJerseyMapFromChrisRevised1.png, but for various reasons did not add an {{ information}} block, or indicate your (user) name on the file description page. Media uploaded to Wikipedia needs information on the SPECIFIC authorship and source of files, to ensure that it complies with copyright laws in various jurisdictions.
If it's entirely your own work:
please include {{
own}} in the relevant source field, amend the {{
information}} added by a third party, ensuring that your user name (or name you want used for attribution) is clear in the author field, and change the license to an appropriate "self" variant (if such a license is not already used). You should also add an |author= parameter to the license tag, to assist reviews and image patrollers.
|claimed=yes
parameter to the tag.If it's not entirely your own work, or the media
is based on the work of others:
Please update the source and authorship fields, so that they accurately reflect the source and authors of the original work(s), as well as the derivative you created. You should also not use a "self" license unless the work is entirely you own. Media that is incorrectly claimed as self or {{
own}}, will eventually be listed at
Files for Discussion or deleted, unless it's full status is entirely clear to other contributors, reviewers and image patrollers. You should also read
Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission which details how to confirm any permissions you obtained for works by others that are still in copyright.
Whilst this notification, relates to a single media upload, it would also be appreciated if you could ensure that appropriate attribution exists for other media you uploaded, You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.
If media is not claimed, and there's no other obvious source or authorship information, the file may have to be removed for copyright reasons.
It's okay to remove or strike messages like this once the concerns have been addressed. :). ShakespeareFan00 ( talk) 16:13, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
The file File:CentralJerseyMapFromChrisRevised1.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:01, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
The file File:CentralJerseyMapFromChris2.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:01, 11 February 2020 (UTC)