User talk:Alexs letterbox

This user may have left Wikipedia. Alexs letterbox has not edited Wikipedia for a considerable amount of time. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Image:Simon Rattle.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Simon Rattle.png. 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. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
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 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. --Chowbok ☠ 22:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Porgy and Bess

Random comments by anons

I am not sure how to contact you through wiki so i will like this.. One of the great things about wiki is the depth and breadth of the knowledge to be found, while i willingly concede my first entry on porgy and bess contained superfluous and maybe even sycophantic, the latest contribution is a totally unbiased account of a very important chapter in the history of Porgy and Bess. As you know an encyclopedia contains comprehensive information on various subjects. I cant understand why wiki users shouldn't have a good deal of information this chapter in the life of porgy and bess and the gershwin estate. This is the first time ever that the gershwin estate have allowed such changes to be made on stage.. It is a Worlds Premiere of Porgy in a new form directed by one of the worlds most successful musical theatre directors. I am not opening up a soap box discussion on the merits and the flaws of the transition, merely documenting the bones of the process and the main players involved. Wiki users will not lose but only gain from this added information. I am very sure that the gershwins would not consider this information to be superfluous or this production to be just another in a line of porgy prodictions..Please consider.

thank you

please feel free to contact me on, Email address removed by Alexs

Porgy and Bess

I have seen you have made changes again, i would appreciate you explaining to me why one line 'would be enough' and 2 paragraphs too much? you obviously have much more wiki experience than me and your understanding would help me. This is the biggest thing to happen to porgy for decades, there are 4 other 'subsequent productions' mentioned each with an average of 2 paragraphs written about them. What qualifies these as being worthy of 2 paragraphs.. is it because they are of american origin? Why is his production less interesting than Crawfords revival? .. Also, because the production is currently running you can imagine why wiki users would want their encyclopedia to have more information on this production. Please contact me so i can understand better. I imagine you also want what is best and are confident enough that an independent assessment would rule on what is best for wiki,

Porgy and Bess

Hi, I appreciate your response but i feel that you have not dealt with the major points of my argument, notably that this is a 'world premiere' successful or no, the fact that the actual Gershwin estate have warranted such a title and such changes is enough in my opinion to note who is involved and the bones of the process. Secondly what do wiki users lose from this additional factual information? Surely the point of wiki is to give people a depth and breadth of knowledge, is this trivia? No, it is an exciting (and at least interesting) part of Porgy's progression.. Is it soap box or some polemic view point? No, nothing written can be disputed.. I am unsure under what wiki guidelines you feel it is necessary to press this point of deleting a couple of lines of intresting information. Surely it is not so important that this information is not available . Please address these 3 issues.

1- Merit of paragraphs- This is a world premiere sanctioned by gershwin estate 2- What do we lose out on by having this factual information 3- What wiki guideline is so explicitly contravened which warrants this kind of attention to 2 paragraphs of undisputed fact?

thank you

Porgy and Bess

Alex, i understand your points although your response i feel doesn't really deal with the three issues i brought up, nowhere have you acknowledged the relevance of this production being a world premiere, that this is (biggest or not) a FIRST for porgy.. and you have also not addressed the second point with fairness. With all due respect, who are you to decide that the extra 20 words should be cut. It's 20 words alex not of trivia but of factual information. 20 words isn't that much ( even when put into the context of the article.) I think - with respect-you should take a step back and remember that there are varied views and perhaps you should restrict your editorial decisions to the indisputable or the obvious. Like I've said I appreciate your stepping in and helping the paragraph from being biased, but this issue is a subjective one and I urge you to be humble enough to allow these lines of indisputable fact and (perhaps) questionable interest into wikipedia. Give the benefit of the doubt. Allow for the fact that you are not executive editor but rather someone who has a great deal of knowledge and experience with wiki who thankfully puts in the time and effort to help steer wiki in the right direction- not squabble over points such as these. Ie 20 extra words is far too much to talk about a production which is a world premiere, a first for the West End etc. I would like to enter my revised paragraph again ie the one without bias but with the added information, will you object to this?

Thank you

Rach 2 citation

Thought I'd let you know that I reverted your {{fact}} tag on the Rach 2 page. The rhythm of the ending is (obviously) in the score, so that's as much citation as should be required. Cheers, theProject 06:13, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Der Ring des Nibelungen

Hello, regarding my edit which you removed, there was a good deal more to the episode than merely background music. If I remember correctly, much of the plot was closer to the Ring cycle than shown in the short description. I haven't seen the episode recently, so I am not going to force the issue and start an edit war. I just want you to know that I did not include the episode for purely superficial reasons. --Kyoko 11:50, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I understand, from that point of view. I'm passably familiar with the Ring cycle through the Solti recording but have not read the Nibelungenlied. In terms of cultural impact, the cartoon episode is less significant than your examples. That's fine. --Kyoko 10:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wagner's autobiog

Hi! You say that Wagner's autobiog Mein Leben was published in 1850 (according to your latest edits to Richard Wagner. But I always thought this had been written for Ludwig and dictated to Cosima, which suggests that it couldn't have been written before 1865. Are you sure that you're not confusing Mein Leben with the Brown Book?--Dogbertd 15:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having had a look at the afterword in the Gray translation it seems that Mein Leben was privately published for Ludwig and a few others in the 1870-1880s, published and translated into English "anonymously" in 1911 and it appears that the first complete public German publication was in 1963 (I'm remembering these dates BTW, as I don't have the book in front of me, but the timespans are right). So I don't know what date one would really use for publication. Maybe easiest simply to remove the date altogether. --Dogbertd 09:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have checked references and corrected text, which see.--Smerus 12:57, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ride of the Valkyries - Birth of a Nation

Hi...maybe I should reword the sentence "pinnacle of Aryan music", but it's a fact that Griffith used it in the climax of his racist opus, when the heros are defending their "Aryan birthright". He sure was dead serious about it, never thinking that it was a "fun piece", hoping that that audience would start to laugh. It's certainly safe to say that Griffith and other people involved in the movie thought that Ride of the Valkyries was a great Aryan battle song.Evenfiel 21:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

You say "it is certainly safe to say", but this is just your opinion. You have no evidence even to prove that Griffith specifically asked Breil to include this particular piece - When a song is included in a movie, it's because the director wanted to use it or at least that he had no objections against it. I have no idea how that could be considered WP:OR. I believe that you need a source to say to refute such an affirmation.Evenfiel 00:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to add that an artist is ultimately responsible for his work, just like a writer is responsible for the opinions presented in his book.Evenfiel 01:26, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll reword it soon then.Evenfiel 15:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Placido_Domingo_Don_Jose.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Placido_Domingo_Don_Jose.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media 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 media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
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 media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media 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 description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 04:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 1.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 1.PNG. 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) 14:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 1.ogg

Thanks for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 1.ogg. 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) 14:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 2.PNG

Thanks for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 2.PNG. 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) 14:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 1.PNG

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 1.PNG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:19, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 2.ogg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 2.ogg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia 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 non-free media 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 3.ogg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 3.ogg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 4.ogg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 4.ogg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 5.PNG

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 5.PNG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:22, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Act IV from Carmen.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Act IV from Carmen.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia 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 non-free media 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 1.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 1.PNG. 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) 12:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 2.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 2.PNG. 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) 12:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 1.ogg)

Thanks for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 1.ogg. 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) 12:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 3.ogg)

Thanks for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 3.ogg. 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) 12:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 3.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 3.PNG. 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) 12:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 4.ogg)

Thanks for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 4.ogg. 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) 12:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 5.PNG)

Thanks for uploading Image:PorgyAndBess Extract 5.PNG. 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) 12:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rachmaninoff's Piano Concerto No 2

On the talk page for Rachmaninoff's Piano Concerto No 2, you made a comment about the difficulty. I am a young musician and am deciding whether to learn this concerto to play in a performance next year. I have taken my Grade 8 and can play other pieces such as Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata (all movements) and Rachmaninoff's Prelude in C sharp minor. Would you say it would be feasible for me to learn this piece to performance standard, or would you say it is out of my league? How difficult would you say it is relative to other well known pieces such as the ones named above. Thanks Wiki Wizard 123 21:19, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited to the Canberra WikiMeetup on 20 November 2011

Hi! We're having a Canberra Wikimeetup on 20 November 2011 at Siren Bar in Gunghalin from 2pm to 4pm. It's most just a chance to chat with other local Wikipedians, get a chance to go a different sort of bar (which is reasonably kid friendly, serves real food, and has non-alcholic options), and, if you're interested, learning more about what Wikimedia Australia and local GLAM projects are happening. We'd love to see you and any Wikipedia/Wikimedia loving friends you have there. --LauraHale (talk) 06:59, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Wagner article is in need of some help

We're in a bit of a pickle in the Wagner discussion page. The issues concerns what can be in the introduction and what not, should it be shortened and are the chapters in the right order? At the Wagner discussion page there is Edit War solution topic and at the end of it some courses of action that I was requested to list. Please help, it seems that the few old hags (me included) don't want to come to any conclusion. Just take fast look. Thank you User:Major Torp (talk) 14:20, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:PorgyandBessBess-Glyndebourne.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:PorgyandBessBess-Glyndebourne.png. 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. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 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 non-free media 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 13:48, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Canberra meetup invitation: January 2013

Canberra Meetup

Next: 9 January 2013

Hi there! You are cordially invited to attend a meetup being held on Wednesday 9 January 2013. Yes, that is tomorrow. Sorry about the short notice.

Details an attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Canberra/January 2013. Hope you can make it! John Vandenberg 09:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in ACT)

Canberra meetup invitation: February 2013

Canberra Meetup

Next: 24 February 2013

Hi there! You are cordially invited to attend a meetup being held on Sunday 24 February 2013. Sorry about the short notice.

Details and attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Canberra/February 2013. Hope you can make it! John Vandenberg 08:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in ACT)

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]

Canberra meetup invitation

Canberra Meetup

Next: 17 February 2016

Hi, you're invited to the Canberra meetup which will take place at King O'Malley's Irish Pub in Civic on 17 February 2016. Bidgee (talk) 00:53, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Canberra meetup invitation (August 2016)

I'll be in Canberra from the 29-30 August, there is a planned meet-up at King O'Malley's (though I'm open to suggestions) from 6pm on the 29 August. Sorry for the short noticed, only had the trip confirmed this afternoon. Bidgee (talk) 10:55, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Canberra meetup

Hi, there will be a meetup in Canberra on the 20 January 2018 at 7pm, I hope you're able to make it but understand that this is very short notice. Bidgee (talk) 12:44, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:PorgyandBessSerena-Glyndebourne.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:PorgyandBessSerena-Glyndebourne.png. 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 in section F6 of the 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:39, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reactivation of Richard Wagner WikiProject

Hi. I recently reactivated WP:WikiProject Richard Wagner and noticed that you have previously been a contributor. Would you like your name to move back into the Active Partipants? Chrisdevelop (talk) 00:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]