User talk:Trade2tradewell

Welcome to the Talk page for user Trade2tradewell

If you are initiating a new conversation, please click here or use the + sign above (next to the edit this page button) to create a new section for your comment.
If you are continuing an existing/past discussion that is less than 14 days old (not yet archived), please find the discussion and click "edit" to add your comment to that discussion.
Please be civil. If you have a problem with any of my edits or reverts, please state the issue calmly and factually, and I will respond in kind. If you are not civil, I may choose to not respond.
Please sign & date all comments by adding ~~~~ at the end of the comment.
If you need to discuss something that doesn't belong on the Talk page, email me.

Welcome!

Hello, Trade2tradewell, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! ×Meegs 00:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taleb

Taleb is NOT writing a book about financial markets.Your reference is from 1996.

John Henry

Hi Trade2tradewell. I noticed you recently created an article John W. Henry by cut-and-pasting from our older article John Henry (baseball). There are a few problems with this:

We want to to focus everyone's effort on a single article, so we do not want to have two separate, nearly-identical, articles. If you want the article to be reachable from a different title, what you should do is create a redirect.
You should never cut and paste content from one article to another without stating the source of the content in your edit summary. When you want to move entire articles, you should use the formal move function. Both of these actions help keep preserve a record of who contributed what content to the articles, and is very important for legal reasons.
When you do create a new article, you do not need to list it at Articles for Creation. You only need to do that if you're notifying an unregistered user that you have created an article on their behalf.

Let me know if you have any questions. ×Meegs 00:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded to your page-move request on my talk page, here. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~). Thanks. ×Meegs 07:22, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image permission

Hi. I've responded very briefly to your question here. Regards. ×Meegs 21:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Peale.jpg

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Dtepper.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dtepper.jpg. The image description 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.

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 fair use images 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.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

archive of newspapers online

List of online newspaper archives some are pay, but if you call a library in that city they will get it for you for free, if you find what your looking for in the index ahead of time. Are you looking for someone in the US? dead or alive? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 20:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ed Seykota

I have responded on my talk page. Nationalparks 21:00, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried Interlibrary loan? Alba 22:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, you can contact the MIT Alumni Association for information on his time at MIT. Alba 22:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have forwarded your request to C. Scott Ananian, who may have access to the libraries and be willing/able to do the in-depth examination that seems to be called for. He is cscott at cscott dot net. He is also on WP as User:cananian. William Ackerman 19:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

walled garden

Hi, A group of self-referential articles written to give a spurious reinforcement of the notability to a weakly notable entity. I'm getting the impression (perhaps wrongly) that this is currently happening around Steve Wisdom. To be distinguished from a series of articles written in good faith about a topic in which an editor is interested. Dlyons493 Talk 18:17, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Hageman

Hi, Having attended some of these games I think it's fair to say they are nowhere near the level of the Premiership. But if he actually does play, then there will be an argument for keeping the article. Does the Irish season start in two weeks? Dlyons493 Talk 09:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We are in the middle of the season shows how closely I follow Irish Soccer these days :-) Dlyons493 Talk

Hi there. Given what you've said I can't really vote keep, since he hasn't played professionally yet, and my own (admittedly highly subjective and possibly overly stricy) interpretation on the "sufficient stature" clause, as regards football, is a top level club in one of the top seeded European or South American nations. Having said that I accept the rule is vague (you might be interested in the work going on at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football/Notability to try to set a clearer standard) so I don't think it would be fair to use it as a justification to delete. Technically if he hasn't yet played it should be deleted and re-created when he does finally play, but given that he's very likely to play when he comes back from injury that would probably be needless bureaucracy. I'm going to go ahead and remove my delete comment, then. If the article does get deleted, the when he plays his first game file the article at deletion review and drop me a line. Hopefully it won't come to that, though. --Daduzi ^talk 11:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Kellogg

Hello Trade2tradewell.

Having looked for (this) Peter Kellogg on Google, the only claim to notability that I could find for him was that he was rich largely due to his father. I can see that his father's firm meets WP:CORP (although the article on Spear, Leeds & Kellogg is minimal both in size and quality). I do not see that this person merits an article in his own right but I do not object to the redirect to Spear, Leeds & Kellogg that was proposed by this AfD's nominator.

Regards -- Alias Flood 03:51, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for drawing my attention to the problem with my vote. Since I find the redirect I thought I was proposing doesn't actually make any sense, I have revised my vote to "keep" for now, since -- from the number of references in the article -- it looks like there is actually a case to be made for notability. — Haeleth Talk 15:19, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article is much better now that you have expanded it, and I certainly see no reason not to keep it now. I have added a note to the deletion discussion drawing people's attention to the fact that you have improved it since people voted to delete it. If it is deleted anyway without further discussion based on the improved version, let me know -- it is sometimes possible to have pages undeleted if the deletion was unfair. — Haeleth Talk 15:01, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your note. In light of this, I have amended my comment to Keep per expansion and cited notability. Thank you also for cleaning up the article in the way that you have. -- Alias Flood 01:01, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dinio

I don't judge those articles, i just correct them, but i do think that there must be lots or articles more before we have that oneGaudio 21:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PalestineFacts

You are absolutely right. I don´t know what I was thinking of! --must have been sleeping, or something. I will remove it at once, and I hope you (or somebody) will expand the article..Regards, Huldra 00:51, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

notes

In David Tepper the notes and references can be merged into one section. Thought I'd check with you before doing that. Zghost 17:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I worked on Delfin Fernandez a little. Left some notes on the talk page. Cheers. Zghost 09:00, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dinio

Perdona mi tardanza en contestar tu mensaje del 25 de Julio. Desgraciadamente, me parece que no voy a poder ayudarte mucho ya que mis conocimientos sobre Dinio son bastante escasos. Sin embargo, si piensas que algún ámbito en el que puedo ser útil sin saberlo yo mismo porque soy de España, no dudes en hacérmelo saber. MJGR 07:25, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

newspapers & magazines request?

Hi there, I noticed your (very old) request here: Wikipedia_talk:Newspapers_and_magazines_request_service. Did you ever get these articles from someone? If not, would you still like them? Leave a note on my talk page. Cheers, phoebe 04:53, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Microfilm: depends on the article, but I don't have a good way to get pdfs from microfiche/film. I can see what pdf verions I can get; if I don't have access, your library's interlibrary loan can probably help you out. phoebe 22:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Driehaus Prize

A small bit of text about the prize was added to the Richard Driehaus article, under the #Phylantropy section. Is this what you mean? —dogears (talk • contribs) 13:30, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Further reading section from the article & Tom Basso

Hello there. Regarding Pit (open outcry), I deleted two links to different online shops like Amazon and Wiley because it is suggested to use ISBN numbers (which automagically link to a search page where it is possible to find the book in several online stores) than directly link to the product in online shops. The PDF could have stayed, though, however since it is a chapter sample that is not being used as reference it made me think it was used as a way to promote the work. If it is being used as reference, though, it should be indicated in the article itself.

Regarding Tom Basso, I deleted four Amazon links and one Wiley for the same reason. As for Google Book Search, while I understand the idea of letting the user read a page of the book, I am not completely sure it is useful. It is much like linking to a shareware game in Download.com. I believe it would be better if the article used such link as reference. In example, write something related to the page, then reference it with {{cite book}}, and use the URL parameter to point to there. Instead of throwing him an external link where he could read two or three random pages from the book, he would read our article, and be able to expand on something that is already written in the article by checking the page at Google Book Search.

I will see if I can get some comments at Wikipedia:External links about this. Feel free to add the links to the article, if it is decided they are not suitable as external links, they will purged later. -- ReyBrujo 21:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forbes 400

Your additions to the Forbes 400 are being deleted, better get involved in the debate, before your work is undone. Someone is saying anything beyond a top 10 is a copyright violation. Hurry! --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 22:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Rainwater.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rainwater.jpg. 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}}
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

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 18:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More replaceable fair-use images

—Chowbok ☠ 05:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steven A. Cohen

Hello,

Some contributor changed a fact in Cohen's article to state SAC controls $80 billion utilizing leverage. Hard to believe even for SAC I'd say. Should it be deleted? --Tvwatcher 16:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it's not in Cohen's article ...it's in the SAC article. --Tvwatcher 16:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Great to meet a trader here! Hope to exchange some trading techniques with you! I will try to go through your articles first though. Did you happen to use some insider data? Such as Harold Clark Simmons (http://www.secform4.com/insider-trading.php?cik=1037854)? Some people were unhappy with ZEFF DANIEL (http://www.secform4.com/insider-trading.php?cik=732026) who filed his selling as buying, although corrected them later. I did very well in the begining by following Mr. Simmons, but got greedy later on... Any comments on using IBD? Do you have personal website where you post your trading in real time? Thanks!

Image copyright problem with Image:Dinio2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dinio2.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}. If you have not already done so, please also include the source of the image. In many cases this will be the website where you found it.

Please specify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 16:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Dinio3.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Dinio3.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}. If you have not already done so, please also include the source of the image. In many cases this will be the website where you found it.

Please specify the copyright information and source on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 16:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Al Weiss (trader)

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Al Weiss (trader), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Al Weiss (trader). You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. I also nominated a number of other similar article. ---J.S ^(T/C) 03:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Seykota.jpg

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How to keep Peale article in shape?

Hi. Thanks for checking in on the controversial "Controvery" section of the Norman Vincent Peale article.
I stumbled on these (I think) inappropriate additions and tried to clean them up. I don't know much about Peale (that's why I went to read the article!) but I'm pretty sure this material is out of place. Unfortunately its anonymous contributor seems persistent in maintaining the section in a problematic state.
I don't care about Peale, but I do care about WP's quality. I'm frustrated that one determined person not following the rules can create a lot of time-wasting trouble for others who could be spending their time more productively on WP (or elsewhere). I like helping to keep WP in shape, but I want to do it efficiently. I'm new to this kind of situation and wonder what the next step should be.
What would you recommend? Should I ask an admin to weigh in on whether this material fits WP policies? Should I ask an admin to restrict editing from new and anonymous editors? Or something else? I'd be happy to step aside and learn from a more experienced editor how to best deal with this kind of problem. Thanks! Bob schwartz 04:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Would you suggest an RFC, and if so, when? Thanks Bob schwartz 18:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do suggest an RFC now.

Trade2tradewell 20:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 15:28, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Calamos

Up to a point, you are correct, but the article was nominated for speedy deletion as a copy violation. If you recreate the article, you need to address this point as well as the non-advertising rule. Good luck. Deb 11:07, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Oswaldo paya.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Oswaldo paya.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — BigDT 03:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop tagging talk pages

Please stop cluttering up the headers of talk pages. The vast majority of these talk pages do not warrant these headers, they are small, slow-moving articles where a separate to-do list is not necessary to get things done and where the talkheader template is unnecessary (it is only for talk pages that have these problems). —Centrx→talk • 21:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Amosjr.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Amosjr.jpg. 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 that provides substantially the same information. 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, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image 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 '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. MECU≈talk 01:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History page has lost info?

Hello

A redirect was made to a page here [1] and all the previous history before the redirect was somehow lost. How do we get all the History from these 2 pages together?

Thank you
--Trade2tradewell 23:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect is simple some special syntax in a page that tells MediaWiki to pull a different page from the database. Redirects do not affect page history at all. If you go to Christopher Gardner, you will get redirected to Chris Gardner. Notice the "(Redirected from Christopher Gardner)" text right below the page title. Click the link in that text, and you'll be sent back to Christopher Gardner but with redirection forced off. You can then view the history or talk for that page.

Also, while I'm glad to be of help, I'm kind of curious as to why you asked me this. As far as I know, I'm nobody special at Wikipedia. :) —DragonHawk (talk) 00:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 18 January, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alexander Lebedev, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

-- Yomangani ^talk 01:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of personalities associated with Wall Street

I changed that to 3 columns since I believe that a single column with short entries leaves too much white space and takes too long to display the entire list. If you look at the line at the top of the list you can see the two numbers you can modify to change the number of columns displayed. In some cases, two can be the better choice. In others, four. It all depends on what is being displayed. In this case I think three is the correct number. Vegaswikian 19:33, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:BarbaraCoxAnthony.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:BarbaraCoxAnthony.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 13:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Chris Gardner

The article Chris Gardner you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:Chris Gardner for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations. Wikiwoohoo 14:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:DennisWashington.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:DennisWashington.JPG. 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 that provides substantially the same information. 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, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image 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 '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. Abu badali ^(talk) 15:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:UniversResolved.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:UniversResolved.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 12:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Bill Lipschutz.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Bill Lipschutz.gif. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 22:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Campaign history of the Roman military‎

Hello, On this article is it posible to have the footnotes in 2 columns, intead of the current very long one? Thanks.--Trade2tradewell 22:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is currently set to format in 3 columns, yes. However, the code for this only works in a few broswers, and notably doesn't work in internet explorer. There's nothing I can do about this I'm afraid! PocklingtonDan 07:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - Questions

Hello. On March 11 you rated Bill Lipschutz article Start Class. Please add comments to the article's Talk page so I can work on those comments. ThanksTinamarie11 21:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative investment

I am new to wik and added some material on Richard D. Wyckoff as he was an important personality in turn of the 20th century Wall Street and should be in the encyclopedia.

Your user name came up via a history on one of the other areas, and I noticed you wanted to create an encyclopedia entry for the term "Alternative investment". Clearly the encyclopedia needs more hedge fund people contributing!!

I took a first stab at a broad definition as it relates to market acceptance with some date on the Hedge Fund niche. I need to give this more thought as time permits.

You have done good work on Wik, thank you. J.C. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jccoppola (talk • contribs) 20:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Tepper Page

Thanks for the barnstar! You had said that there is still more work to be done on Tepper School of Business. If you have any advice or critiques I would appreciate them. Thanks! PadreNuestro 23:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jintropin

Looks like a criminal posted a phishing website in the external links of the article that you wrote. Is there a tag we can put in the external links section warning people that they might be clicking on a phishing website URL ? EnviroGranny 14:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:JeffYass.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:JeffYass.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 12:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Black Swan video

Hi, the video comes from here, a CNN story I have been using as a reference for the article. The link to the video comes is to the left, below the picture (I suspect the one mid-text goes the same place, but could you check?) Thanks, and I hope you have better luck getting it to work properly. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 15:56, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:BrianGelber.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:BrianGelber.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Aksibot 21:19, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Seykota.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Seykota.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. El on ka 23:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help on identifying Hedgespam

HI Trade, how are you? Look, I was in this article and some of the companies look very "spammy". I would like to ask for your help in identifying who are the good and bad guys here... what do you think? Thanks.Stellatomailing 17:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I took out the red links, but it is great to have somebody look into this "spam magnet".Stellatomailing 21:11, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Seykota.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case[2][3]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. J Milburn 12:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

L_bradraschke.jpg

I have tagged Image:L_bradraschke.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 01:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I replied on my talk page, and that reply has now been archived. See here for the archived reply. Any new discussion should probably go on my talk page, though, to make sure I see it. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 13:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew_Hageman.jpg

I have tagged Image:Andrew_Hageman.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. MER-C 11:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yotuel1.jpg

I have tagged Image:Yotuel1.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 16:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yotuel2.jpg

I have tagged Image:Yotuel2.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 16:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yotuel3.jpg

I have tagged Image:Yotuel3.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 16:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GeorgeBKaiser.jpg

I have tagged Image:GeorgeBKaiser.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Rette tast 22:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Granger2.jpg

I have tagged Image:Granger2.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Rette tast 14:46, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BoonePickens.JPG

I have tagged Image:BoonePickens.JPG as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. MER-C 13:09, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Lipschutz

Hi. Following your request (some time ago) to the League of Copyeditors to have a look at the Bill Lipschutz article, I've had a go at the first two sections, cleaning up the prose a bit, and wikifying where possible. I've been a a bit brutal about it, so I'd appreciate your feedback. Regards, Chrisd87 13:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JoeRitchie.jpg

I have tagged Image:JoeRitchie.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Calliopejen1 04:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Business and Economics article on Andrew Saul

Just a heads up that Andrew Saul (ex-CEO of Cache and Brooks Bros.) has been nominated for featured article status here. Any input, comment and suggestions would be greatly appreciated, there is not that much info on him as it relates to his business career, and being an !expert, I'm not quite sure how well I can flesh it out. Please feel free to comment and/or improve the article. Thanks! MrPrada 21:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for noticing the article, and for the Barnstar. I'd be interested on your comments over at talk:Andrew Saul, because it's been removed from the Business & Economics project. I'm not sure if I agree with this decision, and I'd like to get an opinion from someone who is involved with the project. Thanks! MrPrada 04:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paul_Kibii_Tergat.jpg

I have tagged Image:Paul_Kibii_Tergat.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Rette tast 18:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Yotuel3.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Yotuel3.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jusjih 02:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:MarkRitchie.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:MarkRitchie.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:MooreDarla.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:MooreDarla.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. High on a tree 21:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of people associated with Wall Street

An editor has nominated List of people associated with Wall Street, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "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 by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people associated with Wall Street and 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. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 13:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Raul2.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Raul2.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:HerbertAAllen.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:HerbertAAllen.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content 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 this non-free 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 non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images 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 our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 22:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Futuresmag2.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Futuresmag2.gif. 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) 20:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

heads up on citadel and kenneth griffin

hello,

someone is adding arguably libelous and poorly sourced edits to the Kenneth Griffin and citadel articles. I think the new edits should be entirely deleted or if kept very very marginally mentioned. What should be done? --Tvwatcher (talk) 07:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Bruce Kovner.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Bruce Kovner.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content 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 this non-free 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 non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images 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 our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rossrs (talk) 23:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:MarkRitchie.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:MarkRitchie.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 16:27, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MarkKingdon.jpg

I have tagged Image:MarkKingdon.jpg as {{replaceable fair use}}. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}} to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Rettetast (talk) 22:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:CharlesFaukner3.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:CharlesFaukner3.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content 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 this non-free 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 non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images 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 our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Brian Gelber

I have nominated Brian Gelber, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Gelber (2nd nomination). 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 22:29, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Cato.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Cato.JPG. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:NormanVpeale.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:NormanVpeale.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:04, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Dinio1.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Dinio1.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content 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 this non-free 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 non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images 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 our non-free content policy. 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?

Also:

BlueAzure (talk) 03:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hello

If you are around, is it possible that you could take a look at Naked short selling and the related articles? We really need some "economics-people" (who are not G.W.) on that page. Regards, Huldra (talk) 08:56, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SVO-p

Proposed deletion of SVO-p

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

There have been no further contributions to the article (SVO-p) since 2006, and there are no reliable sources to suggest notability. A search for references has failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources in order to comply with notability requirements. The article itself is poorly written with vague explanations that lack neutrality.

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. Io Katai (talk) 01:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Entertainment economics

I noted your edits to Nassim Nicholas Taleb and your background. My mission is to enter into the historical record individuals who have made significant contributions to the economic study of creative industries. This sub-specialty started around mid-20th century so that although most of the key players are still living, they have surpassed retirement age. I would like to give them their due recognition on the Internet before they are gone. Currently their work is not adequately represented on the Internet despite extensive coverage in academic literature (which are not freely accessible via the Internet). Please take a look at my first bio, Arthur De Vany. De Vany is a close associate of Taleb, and many of his studies of probability and uncertainty are related. Thanks. Allenwlee (talk) 18:27, 19 May 2010 (UTC)allen[reply]

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:32, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't copy from articles and paste to others

When you created the Jake Davis(hacker) page (now redirected) you simply copied and pasted most of its content from the LulzSec and Topiary (hacktivist) articles. Please do not do this again; copying from one Wikipedia article and pasting to another when you did not write the original copied passage is copyright infringement and contrary to the Creative Commons license that Wikipedia is published under. One cannot legally take the contributions of an editor to the site and pass it off as their own writing. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 21:23, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jimmy's End (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Guardian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:45, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:ShaunJordan.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:ShaunJordan.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:01, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Andrew Hageman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andrew Hageman 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/Andrew Hageman (2nd nomination) 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. JMHamo (talk) 20:53, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Peterffy

Hi Trade2tradewell,

May I ask where you found and/or how you knew that Thomas Peterffy went to Johns Hopkins? I can't seem to find any source for it. A few years back, you added him to the alumni category: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Peterffy&diff=140122920&oldid=130558795.

I was able to find on a few scarce sources that he got a bachelor's degree from Clark University, but I couldn't find a thing on Johns Hopkins related to him.

Thanks, ɱ (talk) 19:18, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of GAMCO Investors

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on GAMCO Investors, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DGG ( talk ) 18:54, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gregorio Reyes

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

no evidence of actual notability

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. DGG ( talk ) 17:32, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nadine Burke Harris for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nadine Burke Harris 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/Nadine Burke Harris 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. DGG ( talk ) 04:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry investigation

You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Trade2tradewell. Thank you. Brianhe (talk) 03:52, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sleepless Nights (2002 film)

The article Sleepless Nights (2002 film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Nothing found to help it pass WP:NFILM. Tagged since March 2018.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Donaldd23 (talk) 15:42, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bill Lipschutz

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

Per nom

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~RAM (talk) 03:08, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bill Lipschutz for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bill Lipschutz 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/Bill Lipschutz 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.

~RAM (talk) 11:16, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Toby Crabel for deletion

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

Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 22:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Technical Analysis of Stocks & Commodities for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Technical Analysis of Stocks & Commodities 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/Technical Analysis of Stocks & Commodities 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.

Mimi Ho Kora (talk) 20:11, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]