User talk:Prasenberg

Hello there Prasenberg, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page and experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

Image:400px-Den Haag stadhuis april 2004.JPG

Image deletion warning

The image Image:400px-Den Haag stadhuis april 2004.JPG has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it will be deleted. If you have any information on the source or licensing of this image, please go there to provide the necessary information.

Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 09:36, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

Hi,

Please do not sign with just Patrick, that is confusing.

Patrick 23:35, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

"The Hague" or "Hague, The"

Hi, Patrick. I see that you have moved the page on The Hague back to "The Hague" vs. "Hague, The". I won't change it again until we can discuss this. Also, I see that you are from The Hague, so you obviously know a lot about the city. The reason I moved it is that, although I understand that the rule in Dutch is different, I was following the alphabetizing rules in the Oxford and the Webster's Dictionary. The consensus is that in English, it is alphabetized as "Hague, The". I have also checked the World Book Encyclopedia and this is in fact how the title appears.

Cheers - Brent Woods

Having read the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (definite and indefinite articles at beginning of name), I now understand the conventions and I stand corrected. Brent Woods

Image Tagging Image:Pier scheveningen.jpg

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Pier scheveningen.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. Elinnea 18:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:800px-Den_haag_laan_van_meerdenvoort.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:800px-Den_haag_laan_van_meerdenvoort.jpg. 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. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. -- Carnildo 10:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Binnenhof.jpg

Hi Prasenberg. You have forgot to put a licensing tag at a photo of yours, Image:Binnenhof.jpg. Can you please change the current {{GFDL-presumed}} to the licensing tag of your choice? Sincerely, Kjetil_r 14:51, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Ahh, I second that. Your description sounds like {{PD}} to me. 68.39.174.238 19:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

'Unknown' sportspeople

Hi, can you please explain the removal of several sports people born in The Hague? "Unknown", as quoted in the edit summary, is a very subjective argument, don't you think? And therefore not in accordance with what Wikipedia should be, from my opinion. Regards, Darius Dhlomo

I made a comment on the The Hague discussion page in this matter. Regards, Darius Dhlomo

The Hague

In an edit comment you said: "I've lost count on the number of times I have reverted this: the EPO is not in The Hague. Just like the CBS is not in The Hague but in Voorburg, the CBR is in Rijswijk and not in The Hague etc.". May I suggest to you that you may want to stop reverting those edits? To a non-Netherlander Rijswijk and Voorburg are simply suburbs of The Hague; to them the notion that they are separate entities is irrelevant.
For instance, I could claim that the Dutch consulate in the state of Georgia is in Buckhead; that is perfectly true, but does that make sense to you? Things becomes much clearer by saying that the Dutch consulate is in Atlanta; perhaps one could refine that by saying that it is in an Atlanta suburb called Buckhead, but people who don't live in the Atlanta area simply don't care. JdH 09:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I do not agree, but your point is not unreasonable of course. I have asked for feedback on the discussion page of the The Hague-page. Feel free to discuss the matter there and perhaps we can find a consensus. prasenberg 07:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

California Zephyr pics

I saw in the CZ talk page you mentioned that you had pics. Do you have any pictures of the interior of the coach cars (they weren't on the site). You can e-mail me by using http://don.dream-in-color.net/contact.php4 Donald Hosek 23:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

No, I had a roomette and didn't visit the coach cars. All images I have are at my flickr-account.

Non-free use disputed for Image:Logo den haag.gif

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Logo den haag.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 17:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Logo den haag.gif)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 12:50, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

The Hague

I've left some suggestions for improving the article. I'll try to help if I can find the time. Feer 20:14, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Accidental deletion

Thanks for catching this... for some reason when I edit an entire (long) page, it only shows a portion in my edit window. I couldn't even revert back to the last proper version because of this problem. I was hoping somebody would catch it quickly...

License tagging for Image:Moses San Pietro in Vincoli.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Moses San Pietro in Vincoli.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 09:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

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) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Prasenberg. 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)