=:Wyrdlight, I just wanted to say thanks for uploading the image to Wikipedia. In my opinion, it's a fantastic aid to the article on Bodiam Castle and is unmatched by the other available pictures. Nev1 (talk) 16:31, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
These are both very nice clear shots, unfortunately the one you put in the S.E.5 article itself, being obviously (from the "out-of-scale" pilot's head and some other details) one of those "scale" replicas they sell in kit form rather than a "true" reproduction, just won't do in this article, which is really specifically about the original aircraft. On the other hand the other view, in a much more general article, and clearly labelled for what it is is, is just perfect. In brief, I have deleted the first image and re-captioned the second. Hope you undertand. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 22:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I absolutely love the Bodiam Castle photo, and would love to use it in a project that I am working on presently - http://www.latech.co.uk/rpg - but I'm working under the CC BY-NC-SA, rather than CC BY-SA. As the copyright holder, would you be willing to to allow me to use your photo in my project under CC BY-NC-SA?
You can send a reply to richard at latech .co.uk if you want to reach me on email, as I don't have a wikipedia account.
Thanks for uploading File:Renaldherne-thorpe.jpg. 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 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. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Magog - thank you for raising this issue which has arisen previously. I've included within the image information a link from my web site to my wiki user page and the attribution and web domain are the same. I hope this resolves the requirement. Please let me know if there is anything else I should do. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wyrdlight (talk • contribs) 08:06, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Macreaclachan-25Jl6-5548.jpg. 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 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. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:00, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
File permission problem with File:Jersey-gorey.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Jersey-gorey.jpg. 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 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. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 00:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Have added updated information linking back to my website as I am the originator and copyright holder of this work
A tag has been placed on File:Spiritofdubai.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
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. Bulwersator (talk) 16:09, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Wyrdlight, I've taken this deletion up with User:Rhaworth. Your Exif metadata clearly shows your copyright (and clearly it was not a scan but taken with a camera plus telephoto) and thus it should have been flagged as a possible F11. Which would have given you seven days to contest. In stead it was deleted in just ¾ of an hour and I only glance at hourly intervals and so couldn't catch it in time. --Aspro (talk) 18:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Due to historical reasons the Wikimedia info box templates and the Wikipedia info box templates are not always interchangeable. So I have picked the nearest templates that I know to updated File:Spiritofdubai.jpg to show you what it looks like. If you think its OK then I suggest you cut&past the code below into any of your previous uploads where it might not be crystal clear that you're one of the same entity. You'll find them all here: Special:Contributions/Wyrdlight. If when you have done that, let me know and I'll see if I can persuade the Bot (robot) to transfer over to WC those images that have been flagged for moving over to WC. Otherwise, they too might get a speedy delete. Anything that still leaves you scratching your head – just let me know. Note: in the Author section I have added /WyrdLight.com after your name (without a space between the two) which I think is the correct way to show a hard and shared copyright link.
{{Information
|Description={{en|1= type description here after the equals sign }}
|Source=http://www.wyrdlight.com Author: Antony McCallum
|Author=Antony McCallum/WyrdLight.com
|Date=
|Permission=
{{attribution||WyrdLight.com}}
'''Attribution must say:''' WyrdLight.com
Additional licence verification. See http://wyrdlight.com/clients.htm for Wiki user page link.
}}
Hi Wyrdlight,
I've seen you last updates and wonder if this is what you are attempting to achieve:
Instead off : “An image collection is at the commons at: Category:Images by User:Wyrdlight Wyrdlight” might I suggest:
My main list of images are on Wikimedia Commons at
[http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_by_User:Wyrdlight Category:Images by User:Wyrdlight].
The first line will provide a clickable link straight to your Wikimedia Commons gallery.
The last line above will then appear at the bottom of your user page and magically make Wyrdlight appear in the category list of 'Wikipedian photographers'. Notice, that I have replaced {{PAGENAME}} with YOU'RE page name.
I thought that you might like to learn more about our baffling wiki-code. Yet, if you prefer, I could do it for you and change it back if its not what you intended. --Aspro (talk) 20:39, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Prefabfrontroom.jpg, which you've attributed to WyrdLight.com. 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 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. Mz7 (talk) 20:11, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Spiritofdubai.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 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. Kellyhi!12:33, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Tonka.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 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. Stefan2 (talk) 22:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: For the time being I have removed the delete tag. Due to our Wiki-Ways other editors obviously have trouble recognizing this contributors uploads as belonging to him. Yet, as he is a small/medium businessman, all his images are part of his bussiness. Perhaps, the common sense way out of this is for this contributor to upload them as Author : WyrdLight as well as the source being Wyrdlight. The problem with that though, is that Wyrdlight's office desk, filing cabinets etc. don't take any photographs - the sole photographer (author) and owner does. So, the author attribution is right. So, I have cobbled together a template below that may help. Then there is no chance of confusion (say's me hopefully). --Aspro (talk) 19:10, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi WyrdLight, I have more, than noticed, that your images get challenged more than most, even though the copyright status is clear (to me). Mind you you, you did start of ass-about-face which could account for most of the confusion. WP being voluntary, has editors just skimming through hundreds of images and tagging any that seem suspect without further examination. So, I have wondered is this customized template below will dot all the i's and cross all the t's and avoid (saying me hopefully) any further aggro:
File information
Description
English: type description here after the equals sign
The copyright holder of this file, WyrdLight.com, allows anyone to use it for any purpose, provided that the copyright holder is properly attributed. Redistribution, derivative work, commercial use, and all other uses are permitted.
So that you can see the Wiki-code and find it easily, I have created your very own
User:Wyrdlight/sandbox to mess around in.
P.S. By the way, the image of the truck above has no creation date. It is usually taken to be when the image was first captured before any post manipulations. Andy Warhol may disagree but... who am I to argue.
P.P.S. With the benefit of hindsight it may have been easier if you had chosen to create a Wkipedia account using your real name. Thus, avoiding the constant copyright challenges to your own images. However, I can see where your coming from and won't comment on that directly but in a tangental fashion. If (say) you get hit by the proverbial bus tomorrow, then no doubt your descendants will inherit your portfolio... and any royalties deriving from your works. However, the taxman and others would view Wyrdlight as a separate legal entity from yourself ( your accountant can explain it more simply -I'm sure). That may cost your descendants legal fees if they they wanted to know how add new images to your portfolio post mortem in order to create (say) a photo-library including the work of others. You (like I) may have no intention of shredding our mortal coils anytime soon but it is a thing to consider. If you eventually choose to change your user name to your own personal name, then please go to Wikipedia:Changing username.
P.P.P.P.S. I have also moved Cat Wikipedia Photographers from you talk page to your Main User page (where it should be).
PPPPPS. Finally, Oh finally. If you're not camera shy, then please give other editors a chance to know you be before they tag to delete. If you could just place a passport image of your mug on your User Page and you real name, occupation and a few etceteras. Then other editors, new to your work will have a entity they can more relate to, and not immediately assume your a nubie and knows nothing about copyright. This is not, in anyway, obligatory, it is just that in your case it might make your life easier if your happy to have your real identity known. That is why I am not going to criticise Stefan2 for tagging the above image. He does sterling work on ridding the crap on WP. Likewise, I would like to make you experience on WP as enjoyable as possible. So whenever you have any questions -fire away (but please...., nothing about Box Brownies as I can't get the 120 film any more).
--Aspro (talk) 15:56, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Although I have removed the deletion tag from File:Tonka.jpg for now. Stefan2 is right that its attribution is not crystla clear to anyone reading the file page who cant be bothered to do a little clicking on links. Although, I have no doubt that you are indeed the rightful copyright owner (EXIF is proof enought) I can not correct the page on my behalf for you. It is up to you to make this clear. Maybe Stefan2 will agree to the template that I suggest you use. But the confirmation (as you can understand because you require contracts to be sign by your clients etc) has to come from you. You have contributed some really good images. --Aspro (talk) 17:39, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wow - Aspro: many, many thanks for the guidance and help. I'll use the template suggested and sand box as well as look the Tonka file over. I'll update my user page too. I'm not accomplished with Wiki systems, but I will see what I can do with my user page too. Can't thank you enough.
Editor User:Tbhotch noticed that Wikimedia Commons also has a image File:Tonka.jpg so he has renamed your image to File:Real Tonka truck.jpg. Your original image is still here on WP but under this different name -which I think is a good call on his part. Mind you, I have trouble choosing which of the two images shows the most appealing and mouthwatering bodywork. The truck to my mind is winning by a small margin. Sorry Tonka Tomicic. Your looks and curves don't quite have the pulling power of a big, big yellow traction unit. ;-). As an aside: The sign writing of Tonka doesn't look too fresh and solid (i.e. Unlikely Photoshopped) . Yet, it seem like a lot of work for a employee to do to his truck. So, is it genuine (don't answer this if you don't want too – I love adding roof top TV aerials and wristwatches etc. into 17th Century painting – but I do point that out). This type of vehicle registration number is used in many parts of the US so that doesn't give me a clue. The background is too out of focus to give a clue as to why it was there and what is was being used for. At the moment it is an orphaned image, in so much that it is not used on any article. If your can provided little more background, another editor may find someway to use it in an article. Hopefully, this image will be transferd to WC, as it is the only image of this model of truck I have seen. For these type of images that are not uploaded with a definite article in mind, it is probably better to upload to WC in the first instance. Also, it assists other editors, if lots info about the image is placed in the Discriptions. Facts that may not seem of interest to you at the time can be very useful to others at a later date. Hope this helps.--Aspro (talk) 12:38, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Aspro (talk). I've updated the file to the best of my recollection and I'll upload everything to Commons. Thanks again.[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Osborne House, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Brown. 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.
I see you have reverted my image of this item with the summary that the image is freely available. I note that the image was taken by you. Your page states "Consequently I own copyright in all the images I upload and there's a link at http://wyrdlight.com/clients.htm back to Wiki to help confirm my copyright ownership." Can you clear this up, please? Is the image freely available or do you own the copyright to it? Thanks. Jack1956 (talk) 20:04, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Jack1956 - have answered on your talk page,
@ Wyrdlight. Please sign your posts, so that we know who is commenting and not have to guess from the context. If you are using the edit toolbar option (it usually appears above the edit screen as a default 3rd icon from the left), click the signature icon or to automaticaly add two hyphens and four tildes like this: --~~~~.
The four tildes will be automatically replaced with your signature after you have saved the changes, as follows:
Wikimarkup
Resulting code
Resulting display
~~~~
[[User:Wyrdlight|Wyrdlight]] ([[User talk:Wyrdlight|talk]]) 18:39, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Since typing four tildes adds the time and date to your resulting signature, this is the preferred option for signing your posts in discussions. Thanks Aspro (talk) 13:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Aspro - wrongly assumed this was done automatically once signed in!! Will try to remember.
Ho Ho. Then why not add --~~~~ to your last post above now. Try it ! See how it works. Its like practicing opening up a couple of stops when taking a snow scene, rather than trying to correct it after in Floatoslop ;¬)--Aspro (talk) 21:43, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Wyrdlight. 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.
Hello, Wyrdlight. 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.
Hello Carcharoth Yes I'd be more than pleased to help with an article on Brookwood Military Cemetery. You may have seen in the main article on the Brookwood American Cemetery that I've provided nearly all the images and that is probably the best help I could provide on the CWGC Brookwood Cemetery although I do have a site at https://www.wyrdlight.com/brookcwgc/index.html which may have some useful ideas. The scope of an article about the military cemetery is an interesting topic also as the stories it encompasses represent extraordinary and long reaching changes in culture and geopolitics e.g. the destruction of Newfoundland economy in WW1, it's subsequent loss of independence and the burial at Brookwood of the son of the 5th PM of Newfoundland who (the son) died during the dates of WW2. While I'm happy to contribute I'm not best placed to determine the scope of the article and would be happy to be follow a lead on that. Without doubt it would be good to expand the Military Cemetery into its own article, clarify it and perhaps add appropriate internal links eg Eagle Squadrons. I think it would be important (having spent much time with them) to include a paragraph about the work of the gardening team and masons. I'd be happy to work with others on - some years ago I created the page on Runnymede, but that's my only serious experience here. WyrdLight (talk) 21:58, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is a hugely impressive set of photos. I'll think some more on the cemetery article scope and come back to that. If you are willing to provide a photo of the grave of the son of Richard Squires (Richard Anderson Squires), we could put it on that article, though the father predeceased the son so I am never quite sure if it is appropriate in cases like that. Actually, just spotted that the death of the son is mentioned in his mother's article: Helena Squires. A photo of the grave would be appropriate there. Carcharoth (talk) 14:57, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
CWGC Brookwood Military Cemetery UK - headstone of Lieutenant Squires son of Newfoundlands last Prime Minister Here's the image about Lieutenant Squires - perhaps with an image of Newfoundland fallen from the Geat War at the Cemetery it would illustrate the extraordinary sacrifice and imapact of war on Newfoundlanders.
CWGC Brookwood Military Cemetery UK - headstone of Madge Evelyn Hosking one of over 40 Aux Territorial Service women at the cemetery The point about this image is that Private Hosking is representative of many women buried at Brookwood - many people assume wrongly that only men are buried there!
CWGC Brookwood Military Cemetery UK - headstone of Sergeant John Rennie showing his GC awarded for his sacrifice in saving others cf epitaph Sergeant Rennie is one of only less than a handful of people commemorated at the Cemetery awarded the GC - this also illustrates the point that the people there died mostly in or around the coast of the UK of wounds and illness hence there are no VCs present.
CWGC Brookwood Military Cemetery UK - headstone of Thomas Andrew Knowles, South African Infantry & who is the youngest person at age 15 years to be buried at the cemetery The youngest person to be buried at Brookwood.
CWGC Brookwood Military Cemetery UK - headstone of John Stanley Gilders, commemorated at Runnymede when believed lost without trace, and whose body was recovered in 1994 and buried with full military honours at the cemetery in 1995. Indicating the continuing work of the CWGC in researching potential war grave sites, recovering warriors and, often with family, providing a full military honours burial.
Thanks. Pictures of gravestones of any VC holders or GC holders would be good as all the VC holders have articles and I think most of the GC holders as well. Will flag up any others that are mentioned in Wikipedia as I come across them. Carcharoth (talk) 12:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for the photos on my talk page. The mention of that cousin who also died in WWI is fascinating. A connection that may only have been uncovered by your visit to the family grave. I updated the notes at Talk:Tell England. Carcharoth (talk) 17:25, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Been having a bit of trouble knowing how to categories these images on Wikimedia Commons. There are many of different Nationalities buried here and so me thinks the existing categorization could be better. So using my alter-ego I am going to try and get the main category name changed here:Brookwood Military Cemetery. The gist of is though, we now have enough images to subdivided them, so that they are easy to find – which is the whole point of uploading them in the first place – we don't want them to disappear into a black hole, never to be seen again. As you appear to know this subject area better, any comments and suggestions would be welcome. Aspro (talk) 18:57, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Aspro thanks for looking this over - initial thoughts are that Brookwood Military Cemetery is home to both the CWGC and American Battle Monuments Commission so maybe that's a distinction in terms of Government level agencies. The CWGC is also reworking how its database is made searchable and your thought about categorisation by nationality is one (and often the first mentioned by families & historians) and also by war, cemetery / memorial, regiment, rank and awards. Nationality may be interesting in the sense that while the CWGC has reciprocal arrangements with a number of governments and sister organisations the headstones of other nationalities have distinctive shapes including those of Ministry of Defence headstones cared for on their behalf by the CWGC. While CWGC headstones may bear a religious symbol or none American and French headstones include Latin crosses etc, however I'm not sure that would be a useful categorisation. There are men and women buried at Brookwood and maybe that is an appropriate categorisation in thinking about for what people may search. Hope that's of some help. WyrdLight (talk) 22:50, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Wyrdlight. 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.
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.
wikimedia.org.
or 
to automaticaly add two hyphens and four tildes like this: 
