Thanks for uploading Image:1413H002.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:
Thanks for uploading Image:Ashleylauren01.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:
Thanks for uploading Image:Ashleylauren28.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:
A tag has been placed on Liberalforum.org, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on Talk:Liberalforum.org. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Thanks. NeilN12:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on OnTheLeft.org, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain website, blog, forum, or other web content that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on Talk:OnTheLeft.org. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Thanks. NeilN13:02, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.
This is a 24 hour block only, for the recreation of a deleted article. When it expires you may continue to discuss the reasons for its deletion, but in a manner in keeping with WP:CIVIL. If you don't, and continue to harass other users you may find yourself blocked for longer. Please consider this your final warning in regard to your general conduct. LessHeard vanU20:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
I provided the information that was requested, and for my efforts I was threatened by the administrators. This is very poor treatment and rest assured if it persists I will be talking to the media.
Decline reason:
Threats are not an ideal way to request unblocking. You were warned to stop creating promotional articles and links to the appropriate inclusion criteria were provided. You persisted and even called another editor an a-hole. Denied. — IrishGuytalk22:11, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Please stop. If you continue to ignore our policies by introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, you will be blocked. IrishGuy talk 20:16, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
