User talk:Henry Austen

Speedy deletion nomination of Independent Contractors of Australia

A tag has been placed on Independent Contractors of Australia, 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/Business for more information.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can 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 a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent 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. œ ^™ 03:16, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Independent Contractors of Australia

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Independent Contractors of Australia, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page 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 acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button 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. You may freely add information to the page that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Henry Austen (talk) 05:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Independent Contractors of Australia

Hi, thanks for message. You can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~~~~. Several problems.

Your recent article because it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Most of your text was completely unreferenced, and has virtually no factual content (membership, funding, headquarters etc). It's all mission statements, objectives and other spam, so even if it had proper sources there is nothing to show notability.
It was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: powerful and well-respected national association... strives for excellence... providing them with the information they need to thrive... took a lead role... will continue to work with all... to enshrine the right... foremost body in Australia... to champion the profile, status and well-being... to protect their rights... principal lobbyist and advocate... Attacks against independent contractors in one sector must be seen and defended as attacks on all independent contractors... as proven in its 2001 effort in relation... will be actively engaged in research... to further independent contractors’ rights
The Mission, Objectives and Strategies sections are fact-free spam
Who are independent contractors? is self-defined and partisan. Eg They are not employees and do not want to be employees... They want to be free to work flexibly and efficiently in their own time... The state does not need to assume power it should not have... independent contractors accept that they work within business regulatory regimes... Reject the claim that “employment” regulation is the only form of protection available... Deliberately seek out contractor status, in the full knowledge that it involves business risks (not taken by employees), in the confident expectation that they will achieve reward and success in their own business

There is much more in the same vein. Many companies and organisations have Wikipedia articles, but we are an encyclopaedia, not a free advertising service or soapbox. Hope this clarifies Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Text now here Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New version

I've made some MoS fixes, mainly caps and bolding
I've formatted the refs, but my descriptions are just place holders to save me time, format is [url description], you need to change the descriptions to something more useful than eg "law"
The table is good, but you need to give factual stuff more prominence
There is still too much "this is the good stuff we have done... are doing... will do" with four sections (lead, mission, strategies, policies) presenting a positive view of the organisation. The over-reliance on lists, as well as being bad prose, also highlights the one-sidedness
There is no hint that the ICA has ever been criticised or that its views are not shared by all Australians. For example, the bit about the legislation is clearly important, but there is no indication that anyone disagreed with this law, who they were, or why they took a different view
If I was seeing this for the first time, although it's better, I would still immediately see that it's written on behalf of an organisation, rather than to be an encyclopaedia article

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:15, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Independent Contractors of Australia.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the reviewer's talk page

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! DGG ( talk ) 21:01, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation, revised version

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the reviewer's talk page

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! DGG ( talk ) 01:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reason: Not sufficiently improved; The paragraph beginning "More" is promotional, most of the remainder of the content is repetitive, and none of the references I can see address directly the notability of this particular organization. Most are non-independent, or discuss the general situation of the industry. The best, financial Review 7 Aug 2012, is merely that the president is quoted as head of "an organization that represents..." I don't think such references are usually accepted at AfD as sufficient. But if you shorten and rewrite the article sufficiently, I will not hinder you from taking your chances if you want to. DGG ( talk ) 01:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

further changes

The tone remains promotional. It reads like advocacy for the purposes of the organization, and it appears to me that you are unable to fix it. As I said earlier, "You are automatically thinking in terms of what the subject wishes to communicate to the public, but an uninvolved person will think in terms of what the public might wish to know". The quotation of the official wording for the articles section is one half advocacy, and one half meaningless verbiage, as is usual.

There remains repetition between the articles, intro, the funding section, the mission, the campaigns & the objectives section
These sections are written as if the claims of the members of the association represent "fairness" . Those opposing the purposes of the association presumably think otherwise. The usual objection is that this status is a device for the individuals to escape the taxes that other workers pay, & for the employers to escape some of the obligations. (I have nothing against this status--I have myself worked as one.)
The background may be unnecessary-- does the legal situation in australia differ from elsewhere> We have an article on IC, and you link to it.
In section 4, it is not clear which of these have been successfully advocated and those not yet successful.
There is some basic information not yet present: How many of the 1 million independent contractors are members of the association. Without this, how can the importance be judged? This is critical
There is an strong and dubious implied claim in the article that the OBO are essentially part of the same group. They are not. If I run a grocery store, I am not an independent contractor. Do you even admit them to membership?
I think Jim made a mistake. The table is not good. It talks about the number of contractors, not about the association. But we can use it; I am going to put a section on australia in the IC article, and insert the relevant parts of the table as the content.
The references situation is quite unfortunate. If you say the references are only to the Director's speeches, at least give them. It can be implied he speaks for the organization. Whether the community will think it close enough I can not tell.

Here's what I will do: it will be easier for me to fix the article than to convince you to fix it, for you appear unwilling to address the problems. If you will add the statistics on members--and, if possible, growth of membership, both individual and corporate members , and give me the references to Day's speeches, I will rewrite the article for you. Whether the community will think I fix it enough will have to be be seen. to keep thistogether, fix the articles, answer some of my qys here, and let me know on my talk p. that you have done so. DGG ( talk ) 14:34, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Independent Contractors of Australia.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the reviewer's talk page

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Glrx (talk) 19:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image problem File:Ica-logo.png

You've replaced the File:Ica-logo.png meant for used on Immigration and Checkpoints Authority with that of Independent Contractors of Australia. These are two entire different entity.

If there is a need, you can instead requesting for a file move (rename) instead of overwriting legitimate file. Thank you. ♠♠ BanëJ ♠♠ ^(Talk) 03:32, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Indpendent Contractors of Australia logo.png

Thanks for uploading File:Indpendent Contractors of Australia logo.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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-enwikimedia.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-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:08, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Independent Contractors Australia, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Board and Victoria (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) 11:19, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Education in Victoria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alan Hunt (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) 11:36, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apology for Inadvertant 3rd Party Access and Rectification with Changed Password

My apologies for that. My account was accessed by a thrid person. I have now changed my password so that it doesn't happen again. Henry Austen (talk) 02:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reference format

Hello, Henry Austen. When making edits such as this one, make sure to use proper reference format. See WP:Citing sources and Citation templates. External links generally should not be in the main text; see WP:External links. Flyer22 (talk) 01:53, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Norman Lacy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Old Treasury Building (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) 15:08, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Melbourne Museum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Old Treasury Building (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) 23:32, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Education in Victoria may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:48, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (File:Australian Children's Television Foundation logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Australian Children's Television Foundation logo.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 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 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 15:49, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:HamerLacy 200x348.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:HamerLacy 200x348.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, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 03:25, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:NormanLacyMP.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:NormanLacyMP.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. Eeekster (talk) 04:37, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation of image issues

Hi. I notice that you are having difficulties with Wikipedia's image policies. Please see WP:Image use policy for more information. With the very limited exception of images used under a claim of fair use, Wikipedia only accepts images where either (a) the image is public domain because its copyright is expired in the United States or (b) the copyright holder has explicitly granted a license that is compatible with Wikipedia's licensing needs. Merely being freely available for download on the internet does not make it acceptable to use on Wikipedia.

You have uploaded images that I am assuming are from Norman Lacy's personal collection? The copyright is normally owned by the photographer, not by the subject. The exception would be if the photographer was in the employ of the subject, in which case the copyright is normally owned by the photographer's employer.

This - File:NormanLacyBasketballer_at_16W200.jpg - looks like it was a team photo and the copyright is probably owned by whatever professional photography company took the picture.

In any event, this page - Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries - details the steps that Wikipedia requires to document that the images are appropriately licensed. This is a statement of permission that the copyright holder can submit, affirming that they are the copyright holder and licensing the images under suitable terms. --B (talk) 16:40, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:NHL @ ACTF.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:NHL @ ACTF.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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:14, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:MeAsISeeMyselfNGV 200x307.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:MeAsISeeMyselfNGV 200x307.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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:15, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Response to the Above Comments

I Henry Austen today sent the email, the contents of which are shown here, to the To the Wikipedia Volunteer Response Team

"I hereby affirm that I, Norman Lacy, am the sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the attached photograph files: HamerLacy 200x348.jpg NormanLacyMP.jpg NHL @ ACTF.jpg MeAsISeeMyselfNGV 200x307.jpg NormanLacyBasketballer_at_16W200.jpg

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Norman Lacy Copyright holder

25 March, 2015"

File permission problem with File:NormanLacyPeterBlockW200.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:NormanLacyPeterBlockW200.jpg, which you've attributed to Norman Lacy. 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 Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:29, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:NormanLacyDickHamer1977W200.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:NormanLacyDickHamer1977W200.jpg, which you've attributed to Norman Lacy. 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 Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Response to the Above Comments

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined.

I Henry Austen today sent the email, the contents of which are shown here, to the To the Wikipedia Volunteer Response Team

"I hereby affirm that I, Norman Lacy, am the sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the attached photograph files: NormanLacyPeterBlockW200.jpg NormanLacyDickHamer1977W200.jpg,

I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the free license: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).

I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by me.

I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

Norman Lacy Copyright holder

1 November, 2015"

Not done Per this discussion here, it seems like they are copyright violations. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 05:47, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Special Assistance Program in Victorian Primary Schools.pdf

A tag has been placed on File:Special Assistance Program in Victorian Primary Schools.pdf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file that is not an image, sound file or video clip (e.g. a Word document or PDF file) that has no encyclopedic use.

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 "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. Stefan2 (talk) 19:47, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree files

See Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2015 November 15#Files uploaded by User:Henry Austen for a discussion concerning some of the files that you have uploaded. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:55, 15 November 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) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Henry Austen. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Henry Austen. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Henry Austen. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Special Assistance Resource Teacher for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Special Assistance Resource Teacher, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Special Assistance Resource Teacher until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edit to Norman Lacy did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! LibStar (talk) 08:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! LibStar (talk) 23:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked you twice previously to use edit summaries as 99.9% of your edits do not have them. You also mark almost all your edits as minor even though some of your edits are not. Please respond. LibStar (talk) 13:01, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LibStar Sorry for that. My fault. In part it relates to the definition of what is minor. The definition I work by is if it is not a completely new thought, it is minor. That is if it is just an extension or a correction or an improvement of an existing thought, it is minor. Give me your definition and I will try to accommodate that. The other part is probably laziness on my part. For that I am sorry. 49.176.232.83 (talk) 19:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are adding or removing text/citations then it is not minor. LibStar (talk) 11:19, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. What else is not minor? Henry Austen (talk) 03:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Help:Minor edit. LibStar (talk) 11:36, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]