User talk:Alexmadon

Cleaning my talk page.

Please do not hesitate to start a new section.

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for Image:Sicilian clan.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sicilian clan.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. 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 made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. 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:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 10:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mexican song articles

Hi. I'm not sure these articles meet Wikipedia's requirements: (a) you don't cite any sources to show notability; (b) they just consist of the lyrics, but see WP:LYRICS; and (c) aren't the lyrics probably copyright? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry I created La Malagueña before discovering Malagueña Salerosa which is the same song. About the copyright I do not think that lyrics of folk songs are copyrigthed (more than 70 years old)Alexmadon (talk) 15:43, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an expert, but WP:LYRICS says "Copyright usually expires 70 years after the author's death". JohnCD (talk) 15:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, let's remove that page: I just added a REDIRECT from La Malagueña to Malagueña Salerosa as this song is also known as "La Malagueña". Thanks. Alexmadon (talk) 15:57, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's better. I see what that article does is provide links to the lyrics, so the copyright issue is someone else's problem. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:22, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of photo sharing websites

Hi Alex, can you please leave edit summaries? I'm evaluating Atpic right now. Despite its fugliness, it has some unique features (e.g. image preload). Dandv (talk) 08:09, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Atpic for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Atpic, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Atpic until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. VQuakr (talk) 03:55, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Alexmadon. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Atpic.
Message added 23:32, 23 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Atpic

You say these sources mention Atpic - that merely establishes existence, which isn't in doubt. What we are looking for is a bit more in depth about Atpic, not a general 'you can use A, B, C, D' type thing. A magazine review of Atpic would probably mention the rivals, but would be primarily about Atpic. It should be independent, and for real safety, not an editable place like a forum, or written by someone that could be connected with Atpic, like in a blog unless the writer of the blog is themselves notable (and having an article on Wikipedia to prove it...). Press releases are out totally. This may not be easy to achieve for open source or otherwise non-commercial software or sites. This is a problem no-one's found a way round yet - how to separate the wheat from the chaff. Length of existence doesn't even help - there are probably things that have hung on for years without being used by more than about 10 people. Keep trying - there's no bar against coming back if this goes. Just make sure there are the required sources when you do. Salting is only used to prevent re-creation of particularly egregious articles - and that doesn't apply here. Good luck. I might even have a look at the place myself. Peridon (talk) 14:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Atpic, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 11:24, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]