User talk:Keir~enwiki

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them;

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Also, you're so right about the crack cocaine thing. You'll know you're hooked when you find yourself sitting loading the "random page" link and changing a little thing on each page you get.

Lastly, can I ask a favour of you - could you sign your name on posts to Wikipedia:Votes for deletion. Doing so makes it much easier to keep track of who's saying what. If you've not already found out, three ~ characters (one after the other) signs your name automatically, and four signs-and-dates it. Thanks for your help, and welcome again! -- Finlay McWalter 23:21, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)~

Polari

Regarding your list of Polari words which have entered mainstream English: I am rather confused. The only dates the artcile gives for Polari is the 1950s and 60s; yet several of the words from your list vastly predate the 50s and 60s. ('Bloke' is the most obvious example; 'bimbo' is regularly used by P. G. Wodehouse; and I have to say that I have my doubts about 'drag' and 'mince' too.) So if you're right in saying those words entered English from Polari, then clearly Polari must have older origins. Please explain! Doops 21:49, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't create the entry on Polari. I simply added my limited knowledge to it. To answer your question, at a guess I would suggest that either (1) Polari is older than the entry suggests and was around in Wodehouse's time; or (2) Wodehouse drew the words from the same Romani sources. I think theory no (1) is probably more likely. Polari doesn't have a strict etymological definition and hasn't been particularly well documented AFAIK, so the Wikipedia entry could be wrong.Keir

Image Tagging Image:Sweeneyjim.jpg

This image may be lol'd.

Thanks for uploading Image:Sweeneyjim.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --OrphanBot 05:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ERICERNIETHEDANCE.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:ERICERNIETHEDANCE.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. Abu badali ^(talk) 21:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Gnitty.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Gnitty.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 00:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Puppywolf

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 Puppywolf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. noq (talk) 18:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Puppywolf for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Puppywolf 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/Puppywolf 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. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:33, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Keir Thomas for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Keir Thomas 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/Keir Thomas 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. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:55, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Keir. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Keir~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

00:54, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

14:53, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Keir Thomas for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Keir Thomas 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/Keir Thomas (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. Tacyarg (talk) 11:34, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]