Hervegirod

Hello, Hervegirod, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Dick Clark 17:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ruby_(programming_language)&curid=25768&diff=275676171&oldid=275671643

"Critical reception" is never used for titles with software, only with movies and books" - I don't know if this is true. For example, it's used for the Firefox and Opera web browser articles. Can you send me the link to this titling guideline? Thanks. WhatisFeelings? (talk) 23:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello, it's not a guideline, but the same section is titled "Criticisms" for Java (programming language), C Sharp (programming language), Adobe flash, Android (operating system), C++, Windows Vista , Office Open XML, OpenDocument, XML, XML Schema (W3C), .NET Framework, etc.... There's also whole articles titled Criticism of Java, Criticism of Windows Vista, etc... Plus the Criticism/Critical reaction for Ruby is mainly a list of technical points that can not be defined as "Critical Reaction". For example, "Ruby 1.8 does not have native support for Unicode or multibyte strings", though being true (there is a source), is not a "critical reaction" voiced against Ruby. However, deleting it because of that would be going too far IMHO. As for Firefox, I can see why the section is titled as it is. It begins with "Forbes.com called Firefox the best browser in a 2004 commentary piece...", which is clearly a critical reaction about this product, and not a technical criticism. As for Opera, this section list the awards earned by Opera. As you see, this is not the same case as for Ruby at all. However, I'm merely not expressing here my opinion, but judging on what I'm used to find in sections titled "Critical reaction" in Wikipedia, this section would have the wrong content. I'm not saying that such a section would not be useful.Hervegirod (talk) 22:38, 9 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Do you agree that all software-related articles should have a "Critical reaction" and "Criticism" section as each are informative to the readers? If you do, you should propose it to the appropriate place since having it as guideline makes sure everything is kept consistent in the future. You say that books and movies mostly use the Critical reaction section, but the problem is that those articles sometimes note negative points in the same section. Wide-spread standardization is needed.WhatisFeelings? (talk) 04:50, 10 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I agree that the two sections are equally useful !! I don't have the time to develop this more for now, because it is very late, but I will do tomorrow ;) Hervegirod (talk) 22:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry that I removed them earlier, not knowing that it was you who put them there, and I'll leave them where they are. However, I can't see much of a difference in the reference column between the two versions; what screen resolution are you using? I'm using a 1280 x 800 at the moment, so I'm guessing it might be different for me at other times (I also use a 1024 x 768 often). Dark Prime (talk) 22:55, 7 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Primordial touring history, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

unencyclopedic list

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. RadioFan (talk) 12:48, 10 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I just removed it from the Primordial main article because it was not appropriate in the main article (I did not created content for this history myself). I have no opinion on if it must be deleted as a specific article or not. Considering the amount of work needed to create such a list, I thought it was fair to create a new article with it to give time to those who created this content to justify it, rather than just deleting it from the main article without warning. Hervegirod (talk) 12:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Jake2, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

A Java port of a commercial video game. This product never reached version 1. I not even sure if the project is still active. This could be a single line in the Quake II article. Certainly not enough quality information for an article.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Magioladitis (talk) 10:04, 11 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

I have nominated Jake2, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jake2. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Magioladitis (talk) 15:03, 16 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Patrick Naughton, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://javastuff.org. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

The copy is borrowing a lot from the Java (Sun)#History article. As for the javastuff.org, it's titled from wikipedia, so there is no copyright violation here. Hervegirod (talk) 11:09, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi. :) If you borrow from another article, you have to make note of it to comply with licensing. As WP:C points out (and the terms of use linked from every edit screen), our contributors do not relinquish copyright in the text they place here, but only license it liberally for reuse. To reuse it "in any form", we have to at least give them credit through a hyperlink or URL. (The current edit screen footer notes, "You agree to be credited, at minimum, through a hyperlink or URL when your contributions are reused in any form." WP:Merge and WP:Split explain a bit about the recommended procedure. At minimum, you should make a note in the edit summary (which will, of course, be viewable from the article's history tab) with a direct wikilink to the source article, saying something like, "Text copied from [[source]]." This tells those interested in tracing the origin of text where to look and satisfies the attribution requirement for our contributors. It's also recommended to make a note in edit summary of the source article in case it is ever nominated for deletion. Wikipedia can't delete the article as long as text from it remains anywhere on the project. If copying extensively, it's also a good idea to use one of the templates for the purpose on the article's talk page. There used to be different ones for the source and destination articles, but it's really been simplified with the creation of one that works: {{copied}}. I've provided attribution with this article so that it complies with licensing, but only used the "copied" tag at the new article's talk page, since I suspect that the older article isn't going anywhere. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:41, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK, I understand your point. As for the javastuff article, they only copied the Java (software platform) article word by word (but acknowledge it), so I don't think I need to link to it, as they can't own any copyright to something they only copied (I even did not know this other article did exist when I created the Patrick Naughton article). Hervegirod (talk) 11:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

No, they have no claims to copyright. It's only the Wikipedia contributors we need to acknowledge. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:36, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK, Thanks for the information. Hervegirod (talk) 13:39, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

I have nominated Criticism of XML, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of XML. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Abc518 (talk) 00:34, 6 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

It is crucial that all components both are instantiated and accessed on the Event Dispatch Thread.

Your example is plainly NOT CORRECT JAVA. If you don't understand this, I would ask you to simply refrain from editing it anymore. I will not let a UNCORRECT Example stand. Stolsvik (talk) 17:54, 5 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

hmmm, the example is over complex for just a Hello World, and it works very well in this oversimple use case without this threading wrapper. I agree that initializing the GUI through the EDT is the best way to do, and I'm all for putting this example in the Event dispatching thread article, but not in the Swing article, because to understand it you would first have to understand what is the EDT and how it works. Without a fair understanding of what the EDT is, and also how threading work in Java, the Swing example you propose is completely cryptic and fail miserably in its purpose (even if the code is 100% right). Much better to use the simplest Hello World Swing example, and point to the EDT article for explaining why this simplest Swing Hello World is not the best way to do. Wikipedia is not here to show that editors master what they are talking about, but to try to explain things to readers as an encyclopedia should do. Hervegirod (talk) 00:17, 6 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

But you cannot possibly let an incorrect example be presented. I now link to the EDT article, AND supply lots of links to the relevant information. Sending of the creation on the EDT with invokeLater is not rocket science. Also, it adds about 4 lines to the example. The example is well commented, and leads the reader through every single step. How can you possibly mean that a correct example, as short as nearly possible, should not be presented, but instead a certifiably erroneous example (I have documented this thoroughly) that can possibly lead to memory inconsistencies, deadlock and race conditions?! Stolsvik (talk) 03:20, 6 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Sleep (programming language). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sleep (programming language). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 19 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

  Hello Hervegirod! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 7 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Chris Spencer (musician) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 05:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

 

The article TransVirtual has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article, which appeared to be about a real person, individual animal, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 13:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Hervegirod,

Thanks for taking the time to expand the Steam article. I just wanted to point out, though, that when editing, you should just hit the "Show preview" button at the bottom and read over the sections you changed, rather than just hitting save. This way you are sure of what the article will look like before saving it, and it will cut down on the number of revisions in the article's history page.

Happy editing! Anunnakki (talk) 23:55, 31 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Regarding your edit "2010-03-20T00:14:09 Hervegirod (talk | contribs) (21,690 bytes) (→A basic example: all this part about thread safety in Swing is a repeat from the previous paragraph, and is more in its place in the ADT article) (undo)" Link. The reason for leaving that well-referenced information there was because of people like YOURSELF, that do simply not understand the threading issues with Swing, which thereby go ahead and change the example itself, even though you thereby render it incorrect. This has happened multiple times - and I am trying to correct it every time. I have NEVER left an incorrect example (I of course always compile and run the example DIRECTLY from a copy and paste before leaving the page), but people, including you, seem to constantly wanting to edit it into incorrectness - very obviously because of a lack of knowledge in the field (which makes me wonder why you are messing about in the article in the first place??). Then, because you felt that there was a repetition of information, you just deleted ALL the references to the articles that I had meticulously collected specifically to PROVE to people like YOURSELF that a Swing program NEEDS to have its components handled ON the Event Dispatch Thread - and then even NOT including/moving these specific references somewhere else??! I am amazed, and severely annoyed, by these edits. Stolsvik (talk) 08:12, 30 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Maybe you want to show that you are very good at Swing programming, but it's not the point here in wikipedia. The example and it's associated comments should be simple, and with the comments that I moved to the EDT article, it was absolutely not the case. I did not delete anything from your edits (except the stackoverflow question, because forum sources are generally considered not reliable). Hervegirod (talk) 10:06, 3 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Retribution 2006 film.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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:27, 10 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading File:Slaughtercult cover.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:05, 23 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion has begun about whether the article Scripting Layer for Android, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scripting Layer for Android until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. — Timneu22 · talk 13:36, 12 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello. Concerning your contribution, DO-178, please note that as of November 1, 2008, Wikipedia can no longer accept text content that is only licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. Text content must be released under at least the CC-BY-SA license, and preferably the GFDL. Please see Wikipedia:Licensing update for more information.

• If you have permission from the author to release the text under both licenses, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:DO-178 and send an email with the message to permissions-en wikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:DO-178 with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en wikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under at least the CC-BY-SA license, and preferably the GFDL as well, and note that you have done so on Talk:DO-178.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:26, 25 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

OK, but I don't find it in Wikipedia:Copyrights, so where to look for tips on what text license are allowed to use? Licenses is a very (I would say overly) complex matter here. I guess we only have to blame regulations, not wikipedia, but still... Hervegirod (talk) 01:42, 25 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Basically, CC-BY-SA is the preferred license. Any license deemed compatible with CC-BY-SA is also appropriate (I think that might include CC-BY). Works in the public domain are also allowed. But GFDL-only is not. See WP:FAQ/Copyright#Can I add something to Wikipedia that I got from somewhere else? for more hints. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:54, 25 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

I don't want to reopen the matter for this article, but I can find nowhere in wikipedia why GFDL only is not compatible with wikipedia text?. Wjat is now in the FAQ is OK to avoid to do a mistake, but not to understand why there is a problem with GFDL only. The FAQ is not clear at all in my opinion. However, thanks for pointing me to the FAQ, and sorry for complaining, but I think that the way it's explained is error-prone as for now. Hervegirod (talk) 01:21, 27 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

It all has to do with Wikipedia:Licensing update. Because the Foundation felt that GFDL alone was not acceptable for Wikipedia's goals, it opted to take advantage of a limited-time clause in version 1.3 of the GFDL to re-license all of its content. This clause only covered text put on Wikipedia before November 1, 2008. Because the Foundation requires that all text contributed to Wikipedia be dual-licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0 and GFDL, any content that is licensed from a website saying GFDL (but not also saying CC-BY-SA 3.0) is considered a copyright violation in the same vein as something from a website saying "non-commercial use only". —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 00:50, 29 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks very much, now it's very clear. However, I think that the Wikipedia:Copyrights is not up to date regarding this situation with GFDL. When I read it, I initially thought (falsely) that GFDL was OK, when it was OK only for content added BEFORE November 1, 2008. Hervegirod (talk) 01:06, 29 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Regarding your dispute with Wondergay - please note that, although you were correct in being polite and in wishing to protect the identities of the women who have made the accusations, there is still some significant doubt about what is going on in the Assange case. DS (talk) 18:59, 4 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello, you are right, but throwing away peoples identities on the Web like Wondergay did was the problem. That's may be the problem of this Assange article / or subject. A lot of people take sides (whether for or against him), and soon become very "hot" in discussions about it. Hervegirod (talk) 20:53, 4 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Those links you added work, but they all point to Sun's site, which just redirects to Oracle now. I can't figure out how to fix them. Ztothefifth (talk) 17:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

It's fixed now. Turned out that the Template:Javadoc:SE used the Template:Javadoc:SE/Home URL constant, which in turn pointed to sun's homepage, which luckily redirected to Oracle. I just changed it, and now it directly points toward oracle site. Hervegirod (talk) 18:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

 

A tag has been placed on LinuxCon, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of LinuxCon and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Beenkeep Rold (talk) 13:07, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm still adding content on it. Besides, I don't know what's the difference between LinuxCon and other events like QuakeCon (which could be seen as advertising for id Software), or MIX, which is a Microsoft event. I know that this is not a valid reason to keep it, but judjing with the number of articles specifically about LinuxCon on Linux Journal, ZDNet, CNET.com, etc... and the fact that this is not a conference organized by one company, I think this may be worthwhile to be kept. Hervegirod (talk) 13:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

• This permission does not give you any special status or authority
• Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
• You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
• If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing!HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:22, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I will try to use it wisely. For the moment I'm going to the WP:AUTOREV article to learn how to use it in the best interest of this project. Hervegirod (talk) 22:08, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, I understand that it allows to reduce the workload of people who patrol new pages, because a new page which was created by a user with these rights is declared as already "patrolled". Learning every day ;) Hervegirod (talk) 22:17, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, it's been brought to my attention that some of your phrasing on Functional Mock-up Interface might be a little too close to some of the sources. May I suggest you have a glance at WP:close paraphrasing and do your best to make sure that all your text (except for small snippets) is your own. Cheers, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:07, 31 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

hmm, sorry, I did not see it, I tried to change the text to be much more different from the sources. I hope it's better now. Hervegirod (talk) 01:47, 1 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

You changed the reflist tag to reflist|2. I reverted that edit. Why should the references displayed in two cols if there is only one reference? mabdul 17:31, 12 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, you were right. I wanted to add sources in the article, but ultimately failed to do so. Now there are 6 of them, so it is useful at last ;) Hervegirod (talk) 18:36, 12 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I agree with the exclusion of BBj, BBj is not not High-Profile, common or well-known. Thanks for the stewardship. JordanHenderson (talk) 18:38, 12 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you than deleting BBj from the article was not justified. Founding no sources except from the developer, I thought it was better to put it in the "New JVM languages" list. Hervegirod (talk) 19:36, 12 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

 

This is an automated message from VWBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Chat en poche, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.faqs.org/copyright/the-happy-hunter-a-comedy-in-three-acts-english-adaptation.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) VWBot (talk) 12:37, 11 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I could not find this file, and I did not even know it existed. so I think it is a mistake from tnhe bot. Hervegirod (talk) 12:39, 11 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Lachassesauvage.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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:07, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Aes dana formors.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).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:00, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Hervegirod. Finally, I've finished my draft and posted it to my userspace, here: User:Mysidae/Moody's. Likewise, I have also posted a fairly detailed note on the Moody's Talk page. I hope you'll take a look at it. I'm at least going to post a note at COI/N as well. As I explain there, assuming there is support for my version, the trickier question may be whether Moody's as a topic should be one article or three. I am OK with either, and that's explained a little more on that Talk page. I am very curious to see your and others' response to the draft, and I'll be very happy to discuss it further on the Moody's discussion page. Many thanks, Mysidae (talk) 21:47, 13 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Hervegirod,

I noticed your input on the talk page of the Swedish original film, and, in fact, followed your suggestion to the letter... see User talk:Trappist the monk's talk page. I just wanted to ask you if you agree with the statement which forms the Subject/headline above.

Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 18:58, 11 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello, thanks for doing this! And I agree with you, a lot of sources wrote about this movie as a remake of the previous one (see for example here. Hervegirod (talk) 23:07, 11 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello Hervegirod,

Thank you for responding so promptly. On December 12, 2011, I added the film to the article entitled List of English-language films based on foreign-language films. Since January 7, I have battled with one rogue non-registered anon to keep it listed. May I request that you post your reply to me above on the relevant Discussion page, and also on the Discussion page for the actual 2011 film. I ask you because I confess that I have not mastered carrying out such a link. Trappist has told me that others would come up with links after I contacted him yesterday, but that he himself wasn't familiar with the subject.

With kindest wishes,

Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 18:34, 12 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for that. Much appreciated. Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 00:21, 13 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Hervegirod (talk) 23:23, 17 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for starting a proper article on Patent monetization! (The redirect was indeed not really appropriate...) Happy editing! Edcolins (talk) 20:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Eh eh thanks, I'm always happy to help ;) Hervegirod (talk) 23:21, 17 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

 

The article Flying Saucer (library) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable layout engine. Lacks citations to independent reliable sources reviewing this software in depth as required by WP:N and WP:NSOFT.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 11:23, 28 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

3G (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Matsushita

3G adoption (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Mobitel

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I noticed from your edits that you're interested in programming, so I thought you might want to know that the Wikimedia open source community welcomes you to get developer access so you can contribute code, critique others' commits, and generally get a better sense of how this place works on a technical level.

Also, the Wikimedia Foundation is hiring programmers, in case you know anyone who's looking, especially for the Java roles (Gerrit and Lucene). Remote work is often feasible.

Best, Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation Engineering Community Manager (talk) 05:59, 16 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

sorry, I only looked at your edit now. Happy new year! I will look at these roles, I will be pleased to help if it is within my abilities. Hervegirod (talk) 17:23, 13 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Hervegirod, in late 2011 you provided some helpful feedback while I was working to improve articles about Moody's, with whom I work. With the assistance of a volunteer editor, these pages were updated, and I made no direct edits in the process. Now this week an unregistered editor added a note about the U.S. credit downgrade to the MIS article, however this downgrade was not assessed by Moody's but S&P, and I believe this editor is simply mistaken. Would you be willing to undo this edit? Many thanks, Mysidae (talk) 21:23, 31 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Sorry I did not log on wikipedia for some days, I logged in and removed the edit which was thoroughly unsourced, so I had absolutely no problem to remove it ;) Looked to me like OR. Hervegirod (talk) 14:33, 2 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Not at all, I appreciate you reviewing the situation and taking action. Many thanks, Mysidae (talk) 21:16, 4 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Hervegirod, thank you again for your help recently. I did not expect to need to approach you (or anyone) again so soon, however, this weekend two IP editors (24.45.162.83 and 98.14.243.231) with no apparent editing history made sweeping changes to the articles for Moody's Investors Service, Moody's Corporation, and Moody's Analytics. In some cases, verified and useful information was deemed "irrelevant" and summarily deleted, and warning templates suggesting the articles be "checked for its neutrality" were added to both the MIS and MCO articles without any explanation. I am willing to explain why these edits are wrong, however I wonder if you agree that they simply merit being rolled back on account of being, most likely to my view, mischief. I have not left a note on the three Moody's articles yet, but if that is necessary I will do that next. Many thanks, Mysidae (talk) 22:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

OK, I'm looking at that! Hervegirod (talk) 13:41, 16 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

It has already be done. Hervegirod (talk) 13:44, 16 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Joueur du Grenier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to RPG, 2D, Last Battle, Silent Service, 3D and Total Recall

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:53, 12 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:F3 Hello World.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 02:50, 22 November 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello Hervegirod! The file VanDrunen-2007.jpg you uploaded is a good candidate for Commons, since you've used the "Cc-by-sa-3.0" license. Don't you wanna publish the picture under the same license over there? I Could help ya with that! -- AlchemistOfJoy (talk) 20:38, 11 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hello, it's my own picture, so there is no problem to publish it on Commons of course. The current license is OK? Hervegirod (talk) 22:58, 18 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

If you're not already watching it, you might care to go look at Talk:Allied Standards Avionics Architecture Council#Just for interest

Graham.Fountain | Talk 15:49, 30 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I'll look at it! Hervegirod (talk) 12:17, 10 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Voyages-sncf.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:46, 19 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

It was used on Voyages-sncf.com or Voyages SNCF. However other editors have uploaded the same image on these two articles, they might have replaced this one, which can then be deleted without any problem. Hervegirod (talk) 23:48, 19 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Infobox SBTVD standard has been nominated for merging with Template:Infobox technology standard. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:55, 10 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Le vaillant petit tailleur 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/Le vaillant petit tailleur until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  01:16, 19 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

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)Reply

 

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

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies)/Wikipedia:Notability (media)/Wikipedia:Notability (websites) requirements. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:58, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I have nominated the above article for speedy deletion as a copyright violation. The prose is copied from https://www.khronos.org/opengl/wiki/Pixel_Buffer_Object. I can find nothing on the web page or the website documentation to indicate that this prose is released under a compatible license. Unfortunately it looks to me like the page will have to be deleted. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:58, 27 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Argh, I thought I expressed the same ideas differently, but it seems that by using only one main source in the article, I fell into this kind of error. My mistake -:( Hervegirod (talk) 22:19, 27 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Please consider moving your free images to Wikimedia Commons. That way, all of the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. Regards. --XXN, 20:41, 4 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

  You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Elaine Herzberg#Requested move 6 April 2018. — IVORK _Discuss 00:28, 10 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vanessa Schneider, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maria Schneider (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 20 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from YouTube into Content ID (algorithm). While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you.--S Philbrick(Talk) 22:01, 9 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I did not know this, even after so many edits ;) I just added the template to the talk page Hervegirod (talk) 22:59, 9 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article .NET Framework version history 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/.NET Framework version history 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. wumbolo ^^^ 10:34, 12 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Francois bon.jpeg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. 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 after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. 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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 09:00, 24 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for the calculation of the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. See User:RonBot for info on how to not get these messages. RonBot (talk) 18:00, 24 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Francois bon.jpeg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item 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 creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content 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, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 22:04, 24 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I could not find any photograph of this writer with a free license clearly stated (those I found had a non free copyright or nothing at all). I added the associated template below the other one as your advice. Hervegirod (talk) 22:18, 24 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:BloodTsunamiTrashMetal.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 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).

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) 02:38, 29 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 16:28, 10 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 15:36, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Done! Hervegirod (talk) 21:32, 23 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 20:38, 3 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

An article you recently created, Haute Autorité pour la transparence de la vie publique, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Jmertel23 (talk) 14:38, 15 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Java version history 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/Java version history 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. Guy (help!) 13:19, 10 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

FYI ---> see Talk:Java_(programming_language)#Merger_proposal. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 17:36, 3 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I will now try to improve the existing article with adding reliable and not first party sources!! Hervegirod (talk) 14:04, 4 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Nifelheim-VulcanoSplit.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 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).

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) 17:55, 25 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, i've recently created a draft article about Amanda Brock, current CEO of OpenUK, I was wondering if maybe you'd be able to take a look at it and see if it would be okay to submit or get approved? Thanks. Amurphy79 (talk) 14:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article NoFrag 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/NoFrag (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.

IgelRM (talk) 17:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)Reply