User talk:BlackSun

Image copyright problem with Image:Presence.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Presence.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 OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Image legality questions. 15:54, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ECP.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:ECP.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Abu badali ^(talk) 20:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

September 2007

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Black Sun, you will be blocked from editing. Jmlk 1 7 23:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BlackSun 23:22, 15 October 2007 (UTC)Jmlk17, I don't know who you think you are, but I'm a strong contributor to the Wikipedia community, and nowhere is it banned to place a single link an external site under the topic heading for which the site is named. That site has been maintained continuously since 2001, and certainly warrants listing under the BlackSun section. If it does not, then why don't you get rid of all other commercial links under that category? Further, Black Sun Journal is non-profit and non-commercial. Chill out please.[reply]

Please review Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages), which states: "External links should rarely, if ever, be given entries in disambiguation pages." Using the disambiguation page as a forum for promoting the external link is not appropriate. Additionally, review WP:WEB which will give you the specific criteria for notability requirements to have your blog added as an article on Wikipedia. Not all blogs are notable. Hope this explains why that addition is not appropriate. Cheers, Ariel♥Gold 00:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your question on my talk page

Hi Black Sun, having results come up on a general Google search is not an indicator of notability on Wikipedia. I provided you the link to review what requirements there are for notability of websites, and that is quite clear. One of the qualifications (the first one) is: "The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial reliable, third-party published works whose source is independent of the site itself." A quick Google News Search shows zero results. There are millions of blogs and websites out there that are not notable per Wikipedia's guidelines. Wikipedia is not a place for promotion of a site, product, or person, and is an encyclopedia of verifiable information, via third-party sources. Also, please place your signature using four tildes at the end of your comments, as it makes them easier to read. Thanks! Ariel♥Gold 01:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Elizabeth Clare Prophet chart of the presence.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Elizabeth Clare Prophet chart of the presence.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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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) 19:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mark L. Prophet for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mark L. Prophet is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark L. Prophet until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Wqwt (talk) 21:45, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]