User talk:Bilbo2c

Image copyright problem with Image:Insects frozen in flight.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Insects frozen in flight.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:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. 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. STBotI (talk) 05:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Flying rod insects.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Flying rod insects.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:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. 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. STBotI (talk) 05:57, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Ghastly bath.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ghastly bath.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:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. 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. Additionally, if you continue uploading bad images, you may be blocked from uploading. STBotI (talk) 06:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Rod (cryptozoology and ufology)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Rod (cryptozoology and ufology). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rod (cryptozoology and ufology). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:04, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Consumer Reports

Your recently left a message on another user’s talk page regarding some content you inserted into the Consumer Reports article which was later removed. As I was involved in editing your insertions, I’ll explain my actions.

I removed your second sentence because of the weasel words ‘would seem’ and because it violates the principle of NPOV. I did not eliminate your first sentence, but did ask for a citation. It was removed by another editor. No summary was given, but uncited material may be removed after a 'reasonable' time. Your talk page comments attempt to justify this claim by stating “For verification one only needs to look at any Consumer Reports magazine -- nowhere will you find any encouragement to provide input as to what to test, nor any address to send this input to”. This method of proof does not conform to wikipedia’s verifability policy, which prohibits original research. Also, see wiki’s evidence of absence entry. ThatSaved (talk) 19:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]