A tag has been placed onUser:M.O.X/Hilarity requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done undersection G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following adeletion discussion, atWikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:Wikipe-tan/Temple. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you maycontest the nomination byvisiting 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 deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line withWikipedia'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 thedeleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a requesthere.Gaismagorm(talk)23:10, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploadingFile:Tiny Mills.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim ofnon-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails thefirst non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may haveno free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go tothe file description page and add the text{{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing<your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. Onthe file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject,requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking onthis 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, per thenon-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at theMedia copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notification. Please refer to thepage's history for further information.DatBot (talk)00:31, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploadingFile:HBC-plane.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 theCC BY-SA or another acceptable free license (seethis list)at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication topermissions-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 letterhere. If you take this step, add{{permission 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 topermissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria atWikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as{{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed atWikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add arationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. SeeWikipedia: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. Here isa list of your uploads.Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described insection F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia'simage use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at theMedia copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notification. Please refer to thepage's history for further information.DatBot (talk)00:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy birthday! Hi M.O.X! On behalf of theBirthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy birthday! Enjoy this special day!DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk)03:06, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thank you foryour edit toPope Leo XIV. Your edit changed the word used to describe a document between two countries (Peru and Vatican City) frompact toagreement. That edit was okay and improved the article slightly, but not for the reason you gave: "Edit to align it with the Vatican's terminology. Its website calls it an 'agreement' in English". That the Vatican used that word is in no way a reason to use it, and might be a reason *not* to use it, because the source it came from isnon-independent. Wikipedia relies onindependent,secondary,reliable sources, and any article from the Vatican does not qualify as independent.

The reason your change is okay anyway, is that if you do anunbiased search for that 1980 accord, the wordagreement is still the word used by the majority of independent sources (although not by all of them). So, for that reason, your edit was fine. Next time, though, instead of adopting whatever the "official" view is by some source close to an event, avoid those sources like the plague, and see what everybody else says *other than* the official sources. Official sources are almost the last ones to be trusted. Thanks again for your contributions to Wikipedia, and keep up the good work!Mathglot (talk)05:10, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]