text:
User talk:Adam Faanes

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. I saw the note on your user page, and yes, it's fine to use subpages for contributions lists.

Here's some tips:
 * You can introduce yourself on the new users page
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * Remember to use the show preview button before you save a page.
 * If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page.

Other useful pages are: how to edit, how to write a great article, naming conventions, manual of style and the Wikipedia policies.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Angela. 08:40, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

Hi there. I saw your note on the new user log. I'm sure we can use contributions on the history of Africa - there's a lot of history, and not many people study it compared to European history. If you're interested in economics, there's a lot to write over there, too. By the way, you don't need to stop working on a section just because someone else knows more than you about it. If each article had to wait for the Wikipedian best qualified to write it, we'd never get anything done. Besides, wiki is a collaboration. Each person does what they can on an article, and the sum is better than any of us could do alone. Isomorphic 18:13, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Excellent. Good luck on West Africa.  I can give you some help on History of Spain if you want - I don't know much about it, but I can translate material from the Spanish Wikipedia.  If you're ever looking for collaborators, check out List of Wikipedians by fields of interest to find out who else is interested in various topics. Isomorphic 19:14, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Dear Adam, re Muslim League. I apologise for my peremptory note last night. I was a bit annoyed when I went to save my article to discover what had been an empty space two hours previously had been filled while I was writing. I assumed that someone had seen Danny's request at my User talk:Adam Carr and decided to write the article just to annoy me, as sometimes happens. It is unusual for someone to create a dead link and ask someone else to write a piece to fill it, so you don't usually need to check. I certainly don't want to discourage historians at Wikipedia, particularly ones called Adam. You are perfectly free to edit my article, as you are free to edit any article, and there is some material in your version which is not in mine, so you are welcome to add it. I think you need to watch the tone of your writing though. It is not considered NPOV to talk about "the excesses and duplicities of British rule" or describe people as "excellent poet and philosopher" or say that Jinnah "cheerfully and nobly accepted the duties of office". Also it is not true to say "the Muslim League became the key political party in government for several decades, and has remained so to the present day." But we can debate these matters when edit the article. Adam 22:54, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Regarding you recent comments on talk:Spanish empire:

I am very interested in improving the History of Spain pages. Although I am a scientist by training I have a keen interest in History. One of the things I try to do with the History of Spain articles is try to pull them away from "traditional" historiography (the Catholic kings were great, the reconquista was a crusade...). Maybe we could try to work together on this.

The bottom-up approach (from the particular to the general) is already taken care of by the wiki model, in that people can write topical articles about whatever they feel like which can later be folded into or coordinated with more general history articles. However, I find that a lot of general articles are not terribly consistent with the topical articles, and there's some work to be done there.

I would like to take a top-down approach, starting with the =History= section of the Spain article, which is really sketchy and actually out of sync with the History of Spain article in its emphasis. I added a couple of paragraphs about preroman Spain to the section, but a lot of work is needed still, and you seem to have a lot of the necessary knowledge.

Inevitably the =Histoy= section will get too large for the Spain article. Then it should be refactored, summarized and the excess material put into the History of Spain article. If some of the sections get too large, they can in turn be refactored and the excess material moved to topical articles, etc. In particular, an article on Al-Andalus is sorely lacking.

What do you think? You could start by looking at the =History= section of the Spain article. — Miguel 01:28, 2004 Apr 7 (UTC)

Let's start work on Spain. The section is already rather long. I think the hardest part will be to summarize the swhole history in a few sentences when the time comes to move the content to History of Spain — Miguel 04:50, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Image:Spanish Galleon.jpg
Nice engraving. Do you know anything more about it? Who is the engraver? When was it drawn? What is the name of the ship? Which port is depicted? What is that mountain in the background? (I'd like to write a nice caption for the galleon article.) Gdr 23:09, 2004 Aug 20 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your reply, which I copied to Image:Spanish Galleon.jpg. I guess "Spanish galleon" will have to do for the caption! Gdr 10:25, 2004 Aug 23 (UTC)

All those images!
Wow! Thanks for the great work in adding all those images to many articles! It really helps bring them to life. In recognition of your efforts, I hereby award you this Working Man's Barnstar. Keep up the good work! – Quadell (talk) (help)  15:04, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

Some of our efforts seem to be in the same vein... it's good to see a compadre around here. :) Ground 15:02, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Adam!
I apologize for using this for such a petty purpose, but check your damned cell phone! We, me and Father, need to talk to you! Dafrito 02:01, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Habsburg Spain
Don't become despondent at the reception of Habsburg Spain, its a brilliant page, and I don't retract or regret one word I said in FA about it. Giano 15:02, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image template
Hi. Thanks for adding great images to articles! Note that Template:PD-old specifies "Author died more than 100 years ago", apparently the last time limit for an old image or work to be clearly PD worldwide. Note that this is dependant on the date of the death of the creator of the work, not the date of the work -- for example a photograph from 1904 is not yet PD-old if the photographer was still alive in 1950. The "PD" tag seems better for old public domain images that don't fit this strict cretiera. (Note that anything pre-1923 can safely be tagged as "PD-US".) Cheers, -- Infrogmation 17:47, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

DYK
 Did you know has been updated and a fact from the article William A. Blakley, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you have another interesting fact to submit, then please suggest it at the section's talk page.

Edouard Herriot
Adam, I am interested in your picture you've obtained of Edouard Herriot. My great aunt told me he is my ggg grandfather, but I have yet to discovered the connection. Have you come across any information about Edouard's personal life? If so, can you direct me there? Great picture!! thanks, Kim seaviewfarm@comcast.net

Pierre Mauroy
Hello, could you add the source of this image on its description page ? thanks, — FoeNyx 13:22, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you :) —FoeNyx 09:48, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Scouting Barnstarn
Did you see this proposal? Scouting Barnstarn --evrik 20:41, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Debre.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Debre.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media 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 media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL-self to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, 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. Thuresson 03:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:French soldier weeping 1940.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:French soldier weeping 1940.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media 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 media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL-self to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, 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. Thuresson 20:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Philip III.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Philip III.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking 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 please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Thuresson 00:09, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Bidault.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bidault.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking 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 please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fred-Chess 08:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

 * The same thing applies to Image:Beregovoy.jpg / Fred-Chess 08:50, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Proposed Georgia Move
As a past participant in the discussion on how to handle the Georgia pages, I thought you might be interested to know that there's a new attempt to reach consensus on the matter being addressed at Talk:Georgia (country). Please come by and share your thoughts to help form a consensus. --Vengeful Cynic 03:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Malraux
Hi! I've used an image you uploaded in several articles, so I was hoping you would know how to update the copyright tag. Thanks for any help you can provide, Sandy 13:18, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:128-2832_IMG.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:128-2832_IMG.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 07:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Ann Richards.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Ann Richards.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.  howch e  ng   {chat} 23:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Malraux.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Malraux.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jkelly 15:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Ann Richards speaking to a crowd.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Ann Richards speaking to a crowd.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Angr 08:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Bob Bullock.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bob Bullock.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 04:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

now Image:Invincible Armada.jpg, was "???"
Hi Adam Faanes, it seems that every other Wikipedia article on the Spanish Armada is using the image that you originally uploaded to the English Wikipedia (and which was later copied to the Commons)! :o) As I saw that it was still pretty poorly labeled there, I'm trying to improve that... and given that it's such a widely used image, I thought it might be worth trying to really track things down ;o) ... So I'm asking you: Under which name did you originally save it? (Unfortunately, the user who uploaded it to the Commons didn't indicate that.) Oddly, I can't find anything in your contributions or anywhere else. It may have been deleted as it's on the Commons... And do you remember from which source you've uploaded it? I mean, there's no doubt it's public domain, I just wondered if you happen to remember... If you don't or prefer not to indicate it, well, obviously no big deal! Cheers, Ibn Battuta 07:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:White-p01.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:White-p01.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Iamunknown 20:35, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Mortier.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Mortier.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 12:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:The_Relief_of_Leiden.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:The_Relief_of_Leiden.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 09:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Battle_of_Pavia.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Battle_of_Pavia.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, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaK 07:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Primo de rivera 1.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Primo de rivera 1.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, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dantadd 14:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Gouin.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Gouin.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Shell babelfish 17:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * NOTE: It appears that this file was subsequently deleted and that another user then uploaded a file with the same name over the available file namespace. No record of the file exists prior to 2010 under this name.   KDS 4444  Talk  12:36, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Étienne-mauricegerard.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Étienne-mauricegerard.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, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaK 11:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Alfonso XIII of Spain.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Alfonso XIII of Spain.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

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.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:14, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Alfonso XIII of Spain.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Alfonso XIII of Spain.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it may 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.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Archives_of_the_Indies.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Archives_of_the_Indies.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, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 16:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Antonio-Maura.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Antonio-Maura.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, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly hi! 13:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Clements1.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Clements1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 06:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Coke Stevenson.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Coke Stevenson.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 06:01, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Blackmun.gif
File:Blackmun.gif is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Blackmun.gif. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Rbarre.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Rbarre.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Maurice Gamelin.jpg
That file is completely missing source information. See commons:File talk:Maurice Gamelin.jpg. --Martin H. (talk) 12:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of '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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Foto12.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Foto12.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 website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:03, 25 December 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:03, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Deschanel.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Deschanel.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 website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 07:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Price daniel.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Price daniel.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 , 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 .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See 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. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 05:39, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Perier.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Perier.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 website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:09, 8 January 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:09, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

File:DucdeChoiseul.jpg needs authorship information.
Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:DucdeChoiseul.jpg is missing information as to its authorship (and or source) , or if such information is provided it is confusing.

Although images may not need author information in un-controversial cases, or where an applicable source is provided, such information aids those making use of the image, and helps verify the copyright status of an image.

If possible, please consider updating the media information page to make the authorship (and or source) of this media clearer.

If the media is your own work, please consider explicitly including your user name or using the own template on the media information page.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:52, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Loyola.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Loyola.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bulwersator (talk) 09:19, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Shivers-p02.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Shivers-p02.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Invincible_Armada.jpg— source problems
Adam, it seems you have a pattern of uploading images with inadequate file information. Let me add one more to your list: File:Invincible_Armada.jpg. I am an OTRS volunteer and we have received an request from PBS to verify the licensing status of this image. You have left the Wikimedia Foundation hanging with this kind of carelessness. KDS 4444 Talk  12:22, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

File:Joanna the Mad.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Joanna the Mad.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:37, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Toledo by El Greco.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Toledo by El Greco.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Ham II (talk) 17:54, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Shivers-p02.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Shivers-p02.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:03, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

File:William the Silent.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:William the Silent.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

File:Martignac.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Martignac.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 12:58, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

title: User talk:Adam Faanes


text:
Big Sandy River (Wyoming)

The Big Sandy River (also called Big Sandy Creek) is a 141 mi tributary of the Green River in Wyoming in the United States.

Course
It rises in eastern Sublette County, on the west side of the continental divide in the southern Wind River Range, in the Bridger Wilderness Area of the Bridger-Teton National Forest.

It flows south, southwest, southeast, then southwest, past the town of Farson and joins the Green in western Sweetwater County.

Above Farson, it is dammed to form the Big Sandy Reservoir.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Big Sandy River (Wyoming)


text:
Shikumen

Shikumen (, Shanghainese: zaq⁸ khu¹ men⁶, IPA: [zᴀʔ¹¹ kʰu¹¹ mən²⁴]) is a traditional Shanghainese architectural style combining Western and Chinese elements that first appeared in the 1860s.

The term 石库门 is derived from the Shanghainese dialect 石箍门, 箍 meaning "to frame or encase." 石箍门 referred to the characteristically "stone-framed door" of the tenement houses. At the height of their popularity, there were 9,000 shikumen-style buildings in Shanghai, comprising 60% of the total housing stock of the city; however, the proportion is currently much lower, as most Shanghainese live in large apartment buildings. Shikumen is classified as one type of lilong residences, sometimes translated as "lane houses" in English.

In 2010, "construction techniques of shikumen lilong architecture" was recognised by the Chinese government on the national non-physical cultural heritage register (no. VIII-210).

Shikumen houses were also introduced to other port cities in China. For example, many were built in the foreign concessions of Hankou (now part of Wuhan), and some can still be seen there today. Shikumen terraces can even be found as far afield as Beijing, where the two shikumen lanes Huakang Li and Tai’an Li, dating from the 1920s, are undergoing restoration.

Structure
Shikumens are two or three-story structures resembling Western terrace houses or townhouses, distinguished by high brick walls enclosing a narrow front yard. The name "stone gate" references these strong gateways.

Each residence abuts another and all are arranged in straight side alleys called longtang (, Shanghainese: lon⁶ daon⁶, IPA: [loŋ¹¹ dɑ̃²⁴], sometimes written as 衖堂 ). The entrance to each alley is usually surmounted by a stylistic stone arch.

The shikumen is a cultural blend of the elements found in Western architecture with traditional Lower Yangtze architecture and social behavior. Traditional Chinese dwellings had a courtyard, and the Shikumen was no exception. Yet, to compromise with its urban nature, it was much smaller and provided an interior haven to the commotions in the streets, allowing for raindrops to fall and vegetation to grow freely within a residence. The courtyard also allowed sunlight and improved ventilation into the rooms.

Origin
This style of housing originally developed when local developers adapted Western-style terrace houses to Chinese conditions. Migrant labourers from surrounding provinces entered Shanghai in large numbers with the establishment of Shanghai as a treaty port in 1843. The 1853 Small Swords Rebellion and the Taiping Revolution drove more migrants and refugees into Shanghai. With the upsurge in demand, property developers began to build a large number of residential buildings for the new Chinese residents of the city. At first, these tended to be wooden buildings that were cheap and quick to build. These wooden buildings were built as terraces, and usually name with "Li" (里, Shanghainese: li⁶) as suffix. These were the first "lilong" buildings in Shanghai. Within 10 months from 1853, 800 dwellings of this type were built.

Because of their flammability, this type of construction was banned by concession authorities in Shanghai. However, with a burgeoning property development market in Shanghai, developers adapted these wooden terraces into the Shikumen. They used the traditional Chinese "litie" technique of wooden frame and load-bearing brick veneer construction, and for each residence used the traditional three-sided courtyard or four-sided courtyard layouts commonly found in the Jiangnan region.

Development
Shikumen residences had a much smaller footprint than traditional courtyard residences, and were accessed by narrow lanes. They were also cheaper to build than Western-style houses. Although more expensive to build than the wooden terraces they replaced, they were sturdier and so attracted higher rents. They were first built in the British concession (later part of the International Settlement; and still later, the pre-merger Huangpu District), but quickly became popular throughout the Old City and Chinese zones, and came to become the predominant form of residential construction in Shanghai. The high profit attracted a whole swathe of property companies to enter the shikumen market.

From the 1910s, various innovations were made to the shikumen in response to social change. With a burgeoning middle class, designers increased the width of lanes between terraces, but the width of each dwelling decreased - from a three-bay hall and two side wings (as was standard in the 19th century) to a two-bay or one-bay hall, and one side wing. Decorations became more elaborate: the main doors of the houses acquired the characteristic elaborate lintels, featuring architraves, archivolts and pediments. By around 1919, increasing population pressures and an increasing wealth gap encouraged the development of smaller, but better equipped, "new type" shikumen. "New type" shikumen were three storeys tall instead of two, and were equipped with modern sanitary equipment. Great emphasis was placed on natural lighting, with most shikumen orientated towards the south, and an internal staircase skylight or atrium to supplement the front and back courtyards. Developments became larger, with a trunk lane leading off the street, and branch lanes leading off the trunk lane. Cars became more popular, so the trunk lanes were typically designed to accommodate cars.

Later history
The heyday of the "new type" shikumen was in the 1920s. From the 1930s they were replaced by newer building types, including newer types of lilong residences, as well as larger modern apartment buildings, before the civil war and the Second Sino-Japanese War completely disrupted the property market in Shanghai.

It was common for families who could not afford the rent on a whole house to sub-let some of the rooms. They were known as "second landlords" (, èr fángdōng) (as opposed to the head-landlord (, dà fángdōng)). "Second landlords" often lived in the same shikumen residence with their tenants. The phenomenon blossomed after the start of the Second Sino-Japanese War: with refugees rushing into the unoccupied concessions from the Chinese zones in Hongkou and Zhabei, and further afield, there was dramatically increased demand for housing in the concessions. "Second landlords" used increasingly creative ways to sub-divide rooms and build add-ons and lean-tos in the courtyards and on the terraces. Shikumen residences became known for being crowded and disorderly. It was not uncommon for a single shikumen residence to be inhabited by dozens of families. A famous satirical comedy of the time, set in one of these houses, was called "The 72 Tenant Families" (《七十二家房客》).

Use
Although designed to be residential, other types of enterprises often operated from shikumen buildings as well, hidden within longtang developments. These include money lenders, traders, scribes, factories, entertainment venues and even schools. For example, one larger shikumen development, Xingren Li, featured more than 20 money lenders. Often, traders would use the ground floor rooms for storage, and live in the upper floors. Chemical and dye dealers were common. Even light industry was found within shikumen communities, such as sock factories and cosmetics factories. Even more common (and common even today in surviving and renovated shikumen lanes) are grocers, restaurants, inns and bath houses.

Densely populated shikumen neighbourhoods provided camouflage for revolutionaries. The Chinese Communist Party held its first conference in a shikumen residence in Shude Li, and its second conference in another shikumen residence in the French Concession. The Communist Youth League first operated out of a shikumen residence on Avenue Joffre.

Shikumen neighbourhoods were also often used for less salubrious trades. The lanes Huile Li and Qunyu Fang, on Foochow Road (now Fuzhou Road), formed the epicentre of Shanghai's red light district before 1949. Gambling and opium dens commonly appeared in shikumen neighbourhoods, along with fortune tellers.

Demise
By the late 1930s, shikumen buildings were already on their way out, overtaken by newer styles of lilong residences, and large apartment buildings. Commercial property development in Shanghai virtually ceased during the Second World War and the Chinese Civil War that followed it. After the end of the war 1949, shikumen construction ceased completely, replaced with planned construction of residential buildings on collectivist principles. In the early 1950s, it was calculated that there were more than 9000 shikumen buildings, comprising 65% of residential housing stock by area in Shanghai. While constructions of new residential buildings decreased this percentage over time, most shikumen neighbourhoods remained unchanged in their crowded state until economic reforms in the 1980s and 90s began the wave of demolition and reconstruction which, by the early 21st century, has left only a few shikumen developments intact. In Xuhui District alone, it has been calculated that shikumen residences had decreased from 2.68 million square metres in 1949, to 0.25 million square metres by the late 1990s. The forced demolition of crowded and stable shikumen communities gave rise to controversies, such as a 2005 incident where a developer resorted to arson to persuade residents to leave, resulting in the death of two elderly residents.

Classification and architecture

Architectural historians classify shikumen into two types, the "old type" and the "new type". The old type was predominantly built from the 1860s until the end of the First World War, while the new type prevailed from after the First World War until the development of shikumen ceased after 1949. Old type shikumen is further divided into an early period and a late period.

The defining characteristic of a shikumen building is the prominent main gate - which also gives rise to the name "shikumen". Typically, this gate is located on the central axis of each dwelling, with twin doors made of heavy wood, painted glossy black. Typical width is around 1.4 metres, with a height of around 2.8 metres. The doors usually possess brass or iron knockers. The original documented name for such buildings was "shigumen" (石箍門, Shanghainese: zaq⁸ ku¹ men⁶), which in Shanghainese Wu meant "gate framed with stone", but over time corrupted into the similar-sounding "shikumen". Each individual dwelling displays typical characteristics of traditional Jiangnan architecture, while the layout of the development as a whole is adopted from Western terrace houses.

Early period
Early period old type shikumen were built between 1869 and 1910. They retained more of the style of traditional Chinese houses, but with a much condensed footprint. There are typically 3 to 5 bays to each dwelling, and two storeys. They used the traditional litie (立帖) (or "brick nogging") style of brick veneer for load-bearing walls. The houses possessed walls of equal height at the front and back, so that each dwelling (despite being part of a terrace) was an enclosed whole, separated from the outside world. This made them popular with the upper end of the residential property market.

The early period shikumen also possessed more features of traditional Chinese architecture: on the external façade of the terrace there are often typically Chinese matou ("horse head") style or Guanyin dou ("Guanyin hood") style gables; the main hall uses floor-to-ceiling windows; decorative boards below eaves; and grid windows on the side wings. However, in contrast to later shikumen buildings, the gates of early period shikumen were not elaborately decorated, and were simply framed in stone. In terms of layout, the shikumen of this period were arranged in lanes of about 3 metres wide - narrower than later buildings - and the attention to orientation, and organization of trunk lanes and branch lanes, both features of later shikumen, were also absent.

In terms of internal lay-out, immediately within the main gate is the front courtyard (tianjing 天井), flanked by wings (xiangfang 厢房) of the house on the left and right. At the centre, facing the courtyard is the hall, or ketang jian (客堂间). This large room typically has an area of about 12 square metres, and is used like a modern sitting room or living room. On either side of the hall are the cijian (次间) or "secondary rooms". Stairs to reach the first floor are located behind the cijian. Behind the hall and the cijian is the back courtyard (houtianjing 后天井), which is about half the size of the front courtyard. The well, which provided water for the house, was located here (though later houses were connected to tap water instead). At the back of the back courtyard are back buildings, usually used as the kitchen, toilet and storage room. On the whole, each dwelling preserved the main features required for traditional Chinese day-to-day living, while saving the land required.

Most early period old style shikumen have been demolished or rebuilt. Representative examples include the Xingren Li, built in 1872 (demolished 1980), and Mianyang Li and Jixiang Li, both located near the Shiliupu dock area.

Late period
Late period shikumen were mostly built between 1910 and 1919. The three-bay wide frontage with two side wings was reduced to one- or two-bay wide, with one side wing. The back courtyard was reduced, but more attention was paid to natural lighting, and the laneways were widened. More Western architectural details found favour: bannisters, doors and windows, staircase, pillar capitals and arch buttresses all used Western decorative styles. The lintel of the main gate also became increasingly elaborate, decorated with semicircular archivolts, triangular pediments or rectangular architraves.

Late period old type shikumen are far better preserved than early period examples. Representative examples include the west and east Siwen Li (in the process of being demolished), north Shude Li, and Daqing Li, built in 1915. One of the few old type shikumen developments to be preserved largely intact is Bugao Li, or Cité Bourgogne (built in the 1930s), in the former French Concession.

New type
New type shikumen were typically built from 1919 to the 1930s. They were also called "reformed style" shikumen residences. The main structural difference between new type and old type shikumen is that new style buildings are three storeys high. They were built of reinforced concrete, rather than brick veneer. Some were equipped with modern sanitary equipment, and natural lighting became a key concern. Developments are typically laid out with a main, trunk lane, with houses arranged along branch lanes leading from the trunk lane. With the advent of motor cars, the trunk lanes were usually built wide enough to accommodate cars. Instead of one lane with one or two rows of houses, new style shikumen were typically developed in large blocks. Standard triangular gables and party walls replaced the more elaborate matou or Guanyin dou styles, with concrete tops. Exposed brick was used for external walls. The main gate frame also switched from stone to brick and painted stone cladding. The architectural style became far more Westernised overall.

Each dwelling was one to two bays wide. Two-bay wide houses "inherited" only one side wing, while one-bay wide houses discarded wings completely. Stairs became less steep. The new second floor typically contained bedrooms, along with a front and a back terrace (shaitai, 晒台). The ground floor were equipped with kitchens (zaopi jian 灶批间). At the back of the house, a "back wing" was added, as well as the tingzi jian (亭子间) or "pergola room", located above the kitchen and below the terrace. This was typically small, with low ceilings, and faced north, making it the least attractive room in the house. They were usually used for storage, or as living quarters for servants.

Numerous new type shikumen have survived. Some well known examples include Jianye Li (now revamped into an upmarket hotel, commercial and residential complex), Siming Cun, and Mingde Li located on Avenue Joffre.

Names
In Chinese, shikumen developments are typically named with a suffix of Li (里, "neighbourhood"), Fang (坊, "ward"), Long (弄, "lane") or Cun (邨, "village"). The first two are traditional suffixes for names of urban precincts, in common use since at least the Tang dynasty. Where an English name was used, "Terrace" was a common suffix.

The first part of the name typically derives from one of three sources. The first kind takes the name of the freeholder or related party: for example Siming Cun is named after the Chinese name ("Siming Bank") of the project's main sponsor, the Ningpo Commercial & Savings Bank; similarly, Meilan Fang takes one syllable from each of the two owners' names - brothers Wu Meixi and Wu Silan. The second kind takes the name of a nearby road or landmark, for example Bao'an Fang is named after the nearby Temple to the Bao'an Situ. The third type uses an auspicious words: such as Jixiang Li ("auspicious"), Ruyi Li ("happiness") and Ping'an Li ("safety"). The Chinese name for Cité Bourgogne, Bugao Li, is both phonetically similar to the French name and has an auspicious meaning of "stepping upwards".

The names are typically inscribed, along with the year of construction, on the arch above the lane entrance.

Notable shikumen neighbourhoods today

Few old type shikumen neighbourhoods survive. Xingren Li, built in 1872, was regarded as a characteristic old type shikumen development. It was located on East Beijing Road, and composed of 24 two-storey residences, which varied in size between three-bay wide and five-bay wide styles. The main lane was 107.5 metres long, and the end walls featured Guanyin dou-style gables. It was demolished in 1980.

Another notable now-demolished development was Siwen Li, located on Xinzha Road. This late period old type shikumen development occupied 4.66 hectares, with 48,000 square metres of floor space. There were a total of 706 residences of two or three storeys. Most of these buildings were one-bay wide, without modern sanitary equipment. The house gates were noted for intricate baroque style lintels. Originally a middle-class neighbourhood, the area became dense slums due to the influx of refugees in the Second Sino-Japanese War. The entire neighbourhood was razed progressively in 2012–2014.

Cité Bourgogne (Bugao Li), located on South Shanxi Road, is a typical old type shikumen development despite being built in the 1930s. The neighbourhood includes 87 two-storey brick veneer residences with a red brick exterior. The trunk lane is about 2.5 wide, and there are numerous branch lanes. The lanes are noted for their main gateways, modeled after traditional Chinese pailou gates. Cité Bourgogne is well preserved in situ as a municipal heritage site, and remains mostly residential.

The largest shikumen neighbourhood which survives in a mostly original state is Jianye Li (建业里), also heritage protected. A new type development located on West Jianguo Road and Yueyang Road, the development is composed of 260 residences, all of which are two storey red brick buildings. This development is noted for its use of traditionally Chinese matou gables, and arched doorways. In 2003, the original residents were relocated, and the buildings were somewhat controversially renovated to become serviced apartments and to house restaurants and other commercial uses.

Shangxian Fang (尚贤坊), located on the site of the main hall of the International Institute of China of Gilbert Reid, is another heritage protected shikumen precinct, which is now being renovated to become "shikumen hotels". Other re-developed shikumen precincts include Xintiandi, where the buildings were extensively reconstructed, and Tianzi Fang, which has been redeveloped for small businesses with an artistic bent, while largely preserving the fabric of the buildings. All of these redevelopment projects have been controversial.

Other than Cité Bourgogne, Shangxian Fang and Jianye Li, other heritage protected shikumen precincts are Siming Cun, Meilan Fang and Rongkang Li.

title: Shikumen


text:
User talk:Mcclade

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here's some tips:
 * You can introduce yourself on the new users page
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
 * Remember to use the show preview button before you save a page.
 * If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page.

Other useful pages are: how to edit, how to write a great article, naming conventions, manual of style and the Wikipedia policies.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Angela. 08:46, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mcclade


text:
Talk:Proto-Indo-European mythology

Anybody want to start a Neolithic Mythology page from non-PIE elements?
It looks like we have a professional reconstruction of the PIE religion and an extensive amount of myths left over; that didn’t make the cut. Is there anyway we can start a new page regarding Neolithic European Mythology; by region? :) Simonater2 (talk) 04:09, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Interesting idea, but quite difficult. We reconstruct PIE myth when three (ideally) or more (even more ideally) branches share a corresponding form and function, the more detailed the correspondence the better. But we have to assume that there were lots of cases where some mythological figure or motif was lost in all but one of the branches, but since there is no trace of it in other branches, we still can't reconstruct it as PIE.

So it becomes pretty much impossible to suss out what features of any particular branch are truly non-IE/native neolithic material, and which are actually PIE in origin, but not well enough attested in enough branches to be solidly reconstructible.

But the same issue applies in the vocabulary in general. Some have tried recently for example to reconstruct the pre-Greek language from the large portion of ancient Greek vocabulary (about half!) that can't be traced back to PIE with certainty. These attempts remain controversial, but they have become more subtle and systematic than some of the earlier hamfisted attempts at this sort of thing.

I hope this is somewhat understandable. Best wishes. Johundhar (talk) 21:39, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

See for example the intro to Beekes's Greek Etymological DictionaryJohundhar (talk) 22:43, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

 * @Johundhar@Simonater2 I might not be understanding it, but isn't what you're proposing original research? Original research is great but on Wikipedia it is not allowed directly. You should do the research and then post it and use it as a source in a wikipedia article. Immanuelle ❤💚💙 (please tag me) 00:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * But, they cannot just post it somewhere themselves. That falls under self-published sources. Such research would have to be published in an independent, reliable source, and, for this subject, that would mean in a peer-reviewed academic journal or a book published by an academic or major publisher. Donald Albury 01:16, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Other propositions
We have 5 sections in this article titled "Other_propositions". Immanuelle ❤💚💙 (please tag me) 21:39, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

 * What do you suggest these sections be called? I think "Other Propositions" is fine, because they are other propositions concerning the subject that the section is under. JungleEntity (talk) 23:30, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Deity infoboxes
It's been a point of minor edit warring on whether infoboxes should be included for Indo European deities. I firmly stand in the pro infobox category as they make it easier for people to get immediate info on such deities. We should come to a consensus here about them rather than just adding and removing them constantly on articles.

. Immanuelle ❤💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 08:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Priesthood
Much is made of Mallory & Adams (1997), but what we say in the priesthood section bears little resemblance to the cited entry about priesthood. There is no mention of the trifunctional ideology discussed in the source (although there is mention of the proposed duality, so someone has clearly read the source), but there are bold statements that are not in the source, such as The king as the high priest would have been the central figure in establishing favourable relations with the other world. or mention of shamans. I have not removed these statements yet, because they are not totally implausible, but at this point it feels like the section has been written from a certain POV and that the source is merely cited to lend credence to it. I think it needs re-writing, or else better sourcing. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:22, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

"Proto-Indo-European" as a classification.
I'm not going to argue about anthropologists and I understand the conclusion they came to with this. But I feel the article fails to mention that the Greek and Roman Pantheons are directly related to the Egyptian and Mesopotamian pantheons, which are not part of this theory of a main Sky deity. There is a mix up here, or it's actually a Proto-Indo-Euro-Semitic religion. To me this seems like most likely a linguistic connection and not relevant to religions in South Asia, in the Indian part, "Dyus Pitr" is a minor character, which makes it seem like it's just a cognate. On the other side of the coin however the Sky father is the main God in Abrahamic faiths but has no relation to Proto-Indo-European and is Afro-Semitic. 2800:A4:1F95:B800:E811:3879:543F:1C4F (talk) 02:15, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

 * Indo-Europeans in their presumed early homelands (Pontic-Caspian steppe) and early migration routes were not in direct contact with Semitic-language speakers (much less Egypt), and such syncretism could have started only after they reached the Mediterranean area or northern tier of the mid-east. See Interpretatio graeca and Interpretatio romana... AnonMoos (talk) 08:50, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Proto-Indo-European mythology