User talk:Brexx

License tagging for Image:Chris-pine-001.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Chris-pine-001.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Janet jackson Discipline.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Janet jackson Discipline.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Jayden james spears federline

A tag has been placed on Jayden james spears federline requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. JohnCD (talk) 20:25, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Jennifer lopez.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Jennifer lopez.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Soxred93 | talk count bot 20:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January 2008

Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Ashlee-simpson-new-nose-2.jpg. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Gwernol 21:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i didnt understand what u really said.....the picture is copy righted,whats the problem..

The problem is that if the picture is copyrighted the person who owns the rights to it can control where it is used and can demand to be paid if it is copied. So Wikipedia can't use it. You'll find more details about this if you click here. JohnCD (talk) 10:05, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Waiting-for-tonight.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Waiting-for-tonight.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Sdsds.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Sdsds.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Mcnew.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Mcnew.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:23, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i dont understand,its copy righted,what do u want me to do exactly...and where exactly...

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sdsds.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Sdsds.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Touch My Body

I have nominated Touch My Body, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Touch My Body. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 21:04, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Janethot.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Janethot.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ohdbp.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Ohdbp.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She Had Brains, a Body, and the Ability to Make Men Love Her

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of She Had Brains, a Body, and the Ability to Make Men Love Her, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.filmaffinity.com/en/film124231.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell,I didnt take anything from that website.......

Touch My Body

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Touch My Body, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Touch My Body. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 06:03, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She Had Brains, a Body, and the Ability to Make Men Love Her

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article She Had Brains, a Body, and the Ability to Make Men Love Her, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of She Had Brains, a Body, and the Ability to Make Men Love Her.

Copyright problems

Hello, Brexx. Concerning your contribution, Dare to Love Me, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material without the permission of the author. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://thecia.com.au/reviews/d/dare-to-love-me.shtml. As a copyright violation, Dare to Love Me appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Dare to Love Me has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Dare to Love Me and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Dare to Love Me with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Dare to Love Me.

However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 06:09, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No more copyright violations

Hello Brex,

Please do not copy and paste from other sites! That is not what Wikipedia is about. Any further copyright violations, may result in your account being blocked for disruption. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 06:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Thatchick.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Thatchick.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Mariah-carey-that-chick-album-cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Mariah-carey-that-chick-album-cover.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Touch My Body (again)

Please don't recreate this article again. None of the sources given confirm that this is the actual single, and none of them are reliable. If the single is released and the song on it is indeed Touch My Body, then recreate the article with proper sources. --Core desat 03:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like hello,losts of radio staitions said it is.....and isnt this proof....[1]

The page doesn't offer any context, so it can't be used as a reliable source for anything. --Core desat 08:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

how come u want to delete touch my body,and nobodys saying anything about janets song rock with you to be deleted,its also not confirmed and there are no "reliable" sources....and doesnt offer any "context"...........do u have something against mariah.....u only seem to be deleting her page......and not other pages with no reliable sources like the one i mentioned....please justify yourself..if u dont have a good enough reason for keeping "rock with you",then i think touch my body should be re created immediately...

~~There isn't an article on that song. Even if there were,~~ There is an article on that song, and it probably should be deleted, but the existence of other articles can't be used to justify the existence of this one. That list appears to be songs available for airplay, but does not explicitly confirm the existence of the song as the single. I would go to WP:DRV with your case (be sure to follow the instructions there so your review gets listed properly). --Core desat 13:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

heloo,why isnt somebody deleting Rock with you article.....???

just as i expected...no answer.......cause u want to keep it..and dont know what to say......if it doesnt get deleted then there is no reason for touch my body not to be re created again.......and btw,when was the last time u heard a song a the radio that wasnt a single.....any song bieng played on radio,means its a single.......so,that website i gave u is more than good enough evidence...

im giving u the last warning,if u dont delete it immediately then i will create touch my body again.....

Rock With U

I noticed that you tagged the page Rock With U for speedy deletion with the reason "this article should be deleted,as it doesnt has and reliable source that this is the next official single". However, "this article should be deleted,as it doesnt has and reliable source that this is the next official single" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use Wikipedia:Articles for deletion if you still want the page to be deleted. Thanks! Admc2006 (talk) 15:43, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 21:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February 2008

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edit(s) to Christina Aguilera, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. Spellcast (talk) 10:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Feedbackvid1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Feedbackvid1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 01:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Wft26.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Wft26.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:40, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Wft28.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Wft28.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:40, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Touch My Body video

Hello and thanks for contributing!

As per WP:Verifiability, WP:RS, and WP:OR, your statement:

The music video for the song is probably completed by now,and will most likely premiere in the coming weeks

is not allowed in this article. If you can find a reliable external source that gives that information, then it can stay. Otherwise, it qualifies as original research and that goes against Wikipedia policy.
Thanks and feel free to ask me for help if you need any. SWik78 (talk) 17:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't mean to be a a pain but, per WP:SPS: self-published books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, forum postings, and similar sources are largely not acceptable. You used a blog as a reference for the video being shot. Please read WP:RS to learn what qualifies as a reliable source and, please, only re-insert the information about the video if you can find a reliable source about it.

By the way, the link that you provided to the blog only says that Mariah is shooting a video this fortnight for her new album which, even if the source was acceptable, says nothing about which video it is that she's shooting. An educated guess would say that it's Touch My Body but it's still a guess, nothing is explicitly stated.

Thanks. SWik78 (talk) 17:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Satisfied???.........please dont delete it,as the reference i posted is a reliable source and is not on a fan site.....and even if the article doesnt say whats the name of the video,i think its obvious by now that its "Touch My Body"......and dont remove december 20,cause if u read the article carefully,you can see that day seven was christmas day,December 25,so day 2 is December 20,which is the day she shot the video........

Thank you for trying to find a reliable reference, however, (and this is a big however), the article you have as a reference says nothing about when or for what song the video is being shot for nor does it say anything about when it will be realeased. We can't assume the information based on some tid-bits and, no, nothing is obvious from that article. All the article says is ''shooting a video this fortnight for her new album. How does that collaborate your statement of Mariah shot the music video for the song on December 20, 2007, while on a christmas vacation in Aspen,the video will most likely premiere in the coming weeks as the song hits radio stations? None of this information appears in that article. Wikipedia is not supposed to be the primary point of reference for people looking for an upcoming single or a video. We meerly document what has happened or what will happen and we only do it if and when someone else (reliable) has already stated the exact same thing. This is not the case in this article. Please remove the information until there is a reliable source explicitly giving information about the video. Thank you. SWik78 (talk) 21:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i removed everything,i only put that mariah has shot the video,which you cant deny,cause it says it in the article,and it should stay for now.......cause in the article,its says on day 2,which is december 20,that mariah will shoot the video this fortnight,(fortnight means;a period of fourteen consecutive days),so you can say she shot it beginning of january......

as she's shooting a video this fortnight for her new album=as shes shooting a video within the coming 14 days...

I know what a fortnight means but that's not my issue. My issue is the fact that there has been nothing reliable presented to confirm anything regarding that video and, in my honest opinion, nothing regarding the video should be in the article. I would suggest that you wait until a reputable source publishes an announcement regarding the video and, just so there's no confusion, by reputable I mean an outlet like Entertainment Weekly or MTV or ET or VH1 or her record label, something that leaves no doubt in anyone's mind that this is happening and that it is happening soon. Ask yourself what purpose does it serve to have that information about the video this early anyways? How would anyone be hurt or shorted if the information about the video was inserted once it was publicly confirmed? Mariah hasn't even confirmed it yet, it's all hearsay. I ask you one more time to please remove the mention of the video until it can be confirmed since this really is against Wikipedia policy. Thank you! SWik78 (talk) 21:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wait,didnt you say before "please, only re-insert the information about the video if you can find a reliable source about it"

and i found a reliable source.....just because mtv or entertainment weekly or her record label didnt mention that she shot the music video,that doesnt mean it didnt happen,it did,and i showed u proof...they didnt mention it,cause its in post-production stages,and as the song hits radio stations,the video will follow..what do u want them to say ,mariah shot the video???,that would be useless,when the video premiers they will say here is the video...anyway,my point is that she did shoot the video,and that piece of information shouldnt be ignored...will it hurt u if that info is kept on the page......

Input from delldot

Hey Brexx, thanks for contributing, you're obviously working hard to improve the Touch My Body article. SWik asked me to give my input on this situation. My take is that it's very important that we accurately represent our sources, so we must only say what's actually in the references we use, and not put anything more that's not in them. So I'd recommend removing any wording that you'd have to use interpretation to get to (e.g. if it says she's shooting "a video", you can't deduce which video and put that in the article; doing so would be considered "synthesis" and is prohibited by WP:OR). Sorry to give you trouble, neither of us is trying to be a jerk about it, and we both appreciate your efforts to improve the article. Leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions or want to discuss anything. Peace, delldot talk 22:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I'm sorry, I think I may have missed a vital point about this issue. Is the source you used a blog? If so, it can't be used as a source. All articles, but most especially articles about living persons must be sourced with reliable sources, which blogs don't count as because it would be easy for them to contain false information. I'm afraid unless we can find a reliable source for the info it will have to be removed for the time being. Sorry! Peace, delldot talk 22:23, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Thatchick.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Thatchick.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speculation

Hi again Brexx. I apologize if I wasn't clear enough in my last two posts, allow me to reiterate: about this edit, you cannot add speculation or conclusions you have drawn yourself to articles. This is considered original research and is strictly prohibited. Everything written in articles must have already been published in a reliable source. Continuing to reinsert the information is pointless; it will simply be reverted by others again, and it will eventually get you blocked. I hope you're willing to discuss changes rather than edit warring, because you can also be blocked for making more than three reverts in a day. I'm not trying to be a jerk here, I hope we can deal with this amicably. Leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions or want to discuss anything. Peace, delldot on a public computer talk 09:01, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Brexx, I noticed that you re-added the material again and were reverted by someone else. Please do not add information without providing a reliable source for it. I'm trying to be nice here, but if you do it again I will have to report you and you will likely be blocked from editing. Leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions or want to discuss anything. delldot on a public computer talk 11:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please please please!!!!!

I'm trying to be nice and assume good faith from you as you're trying to improve certain articles but I will not tolerate your behaviour anymore. You have again created a section in Touch My Body that reports on the music video being shot for the single. As you surely must have learned from last week's discussions with my self and delldot (talk · contribs), fansites such as mariahdailiy.com are not reliable sources. And before you start arguing about reliability of sources and officiality of announcements, please read your own comments on this page regarding the validity of your claims that a music video for Touch My Body was shot on December 20, 2007 according to this article in The Voice. You were so confident in the validity of that source that you said the following:

i removed everything,i only put that mariah has shot the video,which you cant deny,cause it says it in the article,and it should stay for now.......cause in the article,its says on day 2,which is december 20,that mariah will shoot the video this fortnight,(fortnight means;a period of fourteen consecutive days),so you can say she shot it beginning of january......

And later you went on to say

anyway,my point is that she did shoot the video,and that piece of information shouldnt be ignored

You spent more time defending your position (you can read your own comments, I won't reiterate everything) and subsequently proceeded to revert delldot's edits as well as my own edits when we removed the poorly sourced information from the article despite delldot's warnings about possible blocking due to disruptive editing. In retrospect, I would sincerely hope that you could admit that the source was wrong and, as per suggestions from myself and delldot, it was not reliable.
Today, you have recreated the section about the video sourcing it from mariahdaily.com which is a fan site and, therefore, not a reliable source. Not only that, you have copied the information word-for-word from the website which is in contravention of one of the most important policies of Wikipedia: Copyright violations!
Although I still welcome positive contributions from you (since you seem to want to help) edits such as the ones I described above are considered to be disruptive and you have, so far, refused to take advice on this issue. Therefore, I am leaving you this note to inform you that, upon removing your last edit which is a) improperly sourced and b) in possible copyright violation, if you insert such information just one more time, I will report you to the WP:ANI and ask that your behaviour be looked at by administrators and I will ask them to take action against you (ie, block you from editing)if you keep being uncooperative (yes, you are being uncooperative). Consider this your last warning.
Thanks. SWik78 (talk) 21:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell...are u blind......Go to mariah careys official website,you can see all the music video information there....i didnt write anything from a fansite this time...i put a reference....next time please check thankyou........[2]

I mentioned mariahdaily.com being a fansite by mistake. I meant to say mariahcarey.com is a fansite so for I do apologize for my own blunder in writing out the correct website. The truth of the matter is that mariahcarey.com (as well as mariahdaily.com) is a fansite, it's not a reliable publication. I stand behind everything else I said.

By the way, in addition to copying word-for-word the article about the video, you uploaded File:Mctmb.jpg and claimed it to be a non-free image without supplying a fair use rationale. Therefore the image was deleted. Please read Wikipedia:Copyright violations. SWik78 (talk) 21:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what are u talking about,mariahcarey.com is mariahs official website.....its also written on wikipedia,when u got to mariah carey and click official website,it directs u to mariahcarey.com......oh my god,i cant beleive u thought mariahcarey.com is a fansite....your obviously not a mariah fan to think that mariahcarey.com is a fansite.......lol

Per WP:SPS, it is not allowed because it is self-published. It's not an objective third party. SWik78 (talk) 21:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what do u mean by that....u accuse me of the wrong things.....first u tell me that i put mariah daily as a source...then u tell me mariahcarey.com is a fansite......what the hell man..... and what do u mean by that "Per WP:SPS, it is not allowed because it is self-published. It's not an objective third party. "

I thought that I explained myself when I said that I made a mistake in saying that you violated copyright by copying text word-for-word from mariahdaily.com when in fact you violated copyright by copying word-for-word text from mariahcarey.com. I admitted to that mistake, but that does nothing to change the fact that you violated copyright by copying word-for-word text from another website. mariahcarey.com is a self-published website and it fails the criteria neccessary under policy WP:SPS for verifiability and cannot be considered a reliable source. SWik78 (talk) 21:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the word for word thing is now changed......and what do u mean mariahcarey.com is a self-published website,and its not a reliable source,its her official website for gods sake,if her official website is not a reliable source,what is......

File:Mctmb.jpg

I have deleted this image since it is not, as you claimed, a screenshot, but rather a direct copy from here. You have been informed on a number of occasions that you cannot add copyrighted images to Wikipedia. When you go to the image upload page it tells you this in very plain and obvious language. You have persistently violated Wikipedia's rules on this. Please do not upload any more images that you copy from websites or anywhere else. The only images you can upload are ones that you have personally taken or that are in the public domain. Any further violation of this rule will result in you being blocked from editing. Thanks, Gwernol 21:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...why cant it be put............its a promotional pic on the set from "touch my body" video.....how come u didnt say anything when i put a picture of jennifer lopez on the set on this page Ain't It Funny

You cannot upload copyrighted images to Wikipedia. It is against the law. Doing so means that both Wikipedia and you are liable if the copyright holder take legal action. That is why we are very careful to avoid the use of copyrighted material including both text and images. Please stop doing it. As for the other image, I will take a look at it now. Just because no-one has noticed you have done something wrong in the past does not make it okay for you to break the rules now. Gwernol 22:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making me aware of further copyright violations from you. I have deleted Jennifer-eduardo.jpg as an obvious copyright violation from [3]. I have removed the other image from Ain't It Funny since it does not have a fair use rationale for that article. Now, please stop uploading copyrighted imnages. If you do it again, I will block you. Gwernol 22:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for persistent and blatant copyright violations

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for persistent and blatant copyright violations. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Gwernol 22:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why did u do that,u told me not to put any pictures or put text that is copyrighted and i didnt put anyhthing.....???.....i dont get it......i didnt put any pictures again,or text.......u gave me the warning,and i followed it........please unblock me.....this is extremeley unfair and uncalled for,im appalled.....i told u im not gonna violate anything and i didnt....

But that's exactly what you did do. This edit is the text of a review copied directly into the article. Reviews are copyrighted just like other text. You cannot take copyrighted material and add it to Wikipedia articles. If you wish to be unblocked, please add {{unblock|reason}} at the bottom of this page, replacing reason with your reason why you feel the block is not justified. An uninvolved admin will review your contributions and your reason for unblocking. Gwernol 13:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Tn_poster2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tn_poster2.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 Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 22:49, 12 February 2008 (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).

Brexx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i wish to be unblocked,sorry for any mistakes or violations i did earlier,please im asking you to unblock me,i wont do it again.

Decline reason:

You received numerous warnings and have ignored them all. The block is valid. If you could explain WP:IUP sufficiently to show us that you understand why what you were doing was wrong, and how your behaviour will change, please re-request an unblock. — Yamla (talk) 14:52, 13 February 2008 (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.

Image copyright problem with Image:Mariah Carey - Touch my body.ogg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Mariah Carey - Touch my body.ogg. 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:11, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading Touch My Body in its entirity to WP...

Please don't do anything like that again. Uploading and making available the entire song available for download in a WP article is a sure-fire way of getting Wikipedia (and yourself) into legal trouble with the record company. I notice that you've previously been blocked for uploading copyright violation images. Please read Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Non-free content very carefully - before uploading *anything* else. A different admin may have blocked you for a long time - if not indefinitely, had he/she been the one to notice that.

I don't want to block you (so, I won't), as you *do* otherwise seem to be attempting to contribute productively to the project. You should consider this as a final warning, however. Please think before you upload in future. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 13:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Mariah touchmy.ogg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Mariah touchmy.ogg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Mønobi 14:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Careytouchmybody.ogg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Careytouchmybody.ogg. 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Miminew.ogg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Miminew.ogg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 '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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:11, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Mchottt.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Mchottt.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Careytouchmybodyy.ogg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Careytouchmybodyy.ogg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 19:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Mariah carey emc.ogg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Mariah carey emc.ogg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 19:38, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Aint-it-funny-10.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Aint-it-funny-10.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 19:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Mccc.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Mccc.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:07, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning: please read carefully

Brexx, you have returned to uploading copyrighted material, again passing it off as your own. You cannot copy pictures from other web sites and upload them to Wikipedia. You need to stop doing this now. If you continue to upload copyrighted material, whether images or text I will block you for a substantial period of time to prevent the serious damage you are doing to Wikipedia. Please do not take this lightly, it is very important that you stop doing this. Thanks, Gwernol 14:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

how am i passing them as my own...im just putting the poster for that specific movie on the page...as you can see on any other movie page on wikipedia there is a poster,im not doing anything wrong.......—Preceding unsigned comment added by Brexx (talk • contribs)

I am talking about the three Mariah Carey images you uploaded today, all of which you tagged with a license that claimed you were the copyright holder for those images. They are all copyrighted images taken from mariahdaily.com. Gwernol

so,what tag should i put then... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brexx (talk • contribs)

This is not a tagging issue, you cannot upload copyrighted images like those. There is no fair use rationale that could cover those images. They cannot be used in Wikipedia articles. Gwernol 14:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

but if theyre released to the public domain like the david photoshoot pic of mariah for example,what harm will it do,its not like its an unreleased image or something....

tell me how is this issue diffrent from the picture of raven symone or ashlee simpson why are those pics ok to be there —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brexx (talk • contribs)

If they are released into the public domain then they are fine. However all of the images at mariahdaily.com are copyrighted, and unless you have a written statement from the original photographer showing they are in the public domain, you cannot use them. Even if other editors have broken the rules by uploading copyrighted images, that does not give you permission to break those rules. I will check the articls you mention and remove any images from there that break copyright. Gwernol 14:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for persistent copyright violations

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 month in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for persistent, blatant copyright violations. 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.

Gwernol 14:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The David Lachappelle images are clearly not in the public domain. The website you copied the image from [4] has a notice at the bottom that says all imaqes are copyrighted by David Lachappelle. This is exactly the sort of copyrighted image you must not upload to Wikipedia. Gwernol 14:58, 18 February 2008 (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).

Brexx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

sorry,i thought copyright means that you can copy it..??isnt that what "copyright" means?? i think u went too far by blocking me,and for 1 whole month!!!,i just didnt know exactly what u meant,sorry,i wont do it again,its not like i did it on purpose.....,im new to wikipedia,and i dont know every single law,and what evey law means exactly....please unblock....give me 1 last chance,please..........;)

Decline reason:

Given the number of warnings and even a previous block for the same issue, it is disingenuous of you to claim that you did not know that your actions were unacceptable. — CIreland (talk) 16:45, 18 February 2008 (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.

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).

Brexx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i said im sorry,stop being so strict,relax..........stop making things so complicated....wikipedia is becoming more of a law and order site,not an encyclopedia....i repeat im sorry,as my goal was to improve the page,not "violate" any of your "laws"...i was just changing the mariah picture,cause its an old one,and her eyes are even closed,so,i think she deserves to have another picture...anyway,thats not the point,my point is,wiki is bieng to strict on every little detail,that in the future it will becom impossible to edit...anyway,i politely request u to unblock me,my apologies for any inconvenience i made,it WONT happen again....please forgive me...

Decline reason:

Your persistent violations have placed Wikipedia in legal jeopardy. You have still provided no reason to believe you understand exactly how your prior actions were inappropriate. Can you please give an example of an image which would be appropriate. For example, would a copyrighted publicity photograph of Ms. Carey be appropriate? What about an image that you yourself took of Ms. Carey? What about a screenshot you captured of a Ms. Carey music video? — Yamla (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2008 (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.

HELOOOOOOOOOOOOOO,WHY ARE U IGNORING ME ....ANSWER ME

Hi, Brexx. In order for your account to be flagged as requesting unblock, you need to format your request correctly - using the template (Template:Unblock) as indicated above. I have done this for you as a matter of courtesy. Another admin should be along shortly to take a look and review the situation. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 16:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brexx, when you use an unblock notice, you must include a reason why you believe you should be unblocked, or your request will be automatically denied. Gwernol 21:16, 18 February 2008 (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).

Brexx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

thats what i want u to tell me,from what i learned lately,i can only put pictures that i took,or a screenshot i captured from a music video.....is that right,is there any more exceptions??....i said im SORRY....get over it already.....move on....and unblock me.....life goes on..ur gonna unblock me later anyway,so why not now???...why delay,when ur gonna unblock me eventually.....as u can see,i made many good contributions to wikipedia,like the audio sample and the about.com review on touch my body article...so,im only trying to improve wiki....again sorry,i learned my lesson.....ok...for the 100th time please unblock me ASAP..

Decline reason:

You have given no new information why the decisions of the above admins should be overturned. Stifle (talk) 09:17, 19 February 2008 (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.

Additionally, this page has been protected as warned above for persistent use of the unblock template. Stifle (talk) 09:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Mariah touchmy.ogg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Mariah touchmy.ogg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Miminew.ogg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Miminew.ogg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Lindsay-lohan-digital-outlook-over.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lindsay-lohan-digital-outlook-over.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. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:20, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Normal britneboat8.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Normal britneboat8.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. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:21, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Poster theeye.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Poster theeye.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. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:23, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Jftbvid-60.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Jftbvid-60.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Jftbvid-115.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Jftbvid-115.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 05:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Brexx for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Gwernol 16:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have unprotected this page to allow you to request to participate in the Sockpuppet case if you wish. You may either leave a response to the sockpuppet case here and ask for it to be copied to the case page, or you can ask to be unblocked early. You can be unblocked early for the specific purpose of participating in the sockpuppet case. If you request to be unblocked for that purpose you need to undertake not to make edits to any page of Wikipedia except the sockpuppet case page. Gwernol 17:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per evidence at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Brexx, I've extended your block to 6 months. Using sockpuppets to evade your block and edit-war is not tolerated here. MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 08:59, 12 March 2008 (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).

Brexx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

can u unblock me

Decline reason:

No reason given to be unblocked, no assurances of stopping sockpuppetry have been offered. — Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:13, 13 March 2008 (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.

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).

Brexx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

okay,im sorry,i wont do it agian,but u gave me no choice,you block a person for so long,and i like contributing,so its not my fault that i did what i did,again,sorry,can we start fresh??...finish i promise , u will see a new better me.and i will be so much better.love.peace.i wont do it agian,never agian...i hope u can forgive me,were all human,and we all make mistakes,nobody perfect,but there is forgiveness and redemption...were all in this journey together...lets support each other......

Decline reason:

Using secondary accounts to edit when otherwise blocked is not permitted. You are a sock puppet account; with all due respect, please do not waste any more of the project's time with disruptive contributions. AGK § 18:48, 13 March 2008 (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.

Blocked indefinitely

Your continued abuse of sockpuppets shows that you have not the slightest intention of ever abiding by our policies and guidelines. You are now blocked indefinitely. All of your contributions will be reverted. --Yamla (talk) 15:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Allihavevid-85.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Allihavevid-85.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 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 '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 non-free media lacking such an explanation 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? MECU≈talk 16:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry...

i said im sorry......how do u expect me to stop making accounts if u dont unblock me.....if u unblock me,ill stop making acounts...simple...........ur the ones who are making something bad to worse.....stop making a big deal...im not doing anything bad or violating anything now,so i dont get it,why am i still blocked....just get over it already.......i mean well.....im not here do violate anything.......im just trying to help.......and can someone tell yalma to unblockme already......this block is so overrated.....cant u just forgive and forget.....move on people....there are other things to worry about than a stupid block...so unblock me and MOVE ON........again,i come in peace......and i have a right to contribute to wikipedia.....what happend in the past happend....the past is in the past.....now were the present......lets open a new page and start a new chapter.....star fresh..ok..deal..??.......i promise i wont violate anything.....all im asking is another chance......one last chance.....Brexx (talk) 16:02, 25 April 2008 (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).

Brexx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i said im sorry......how do u expect me to stop making accounts if u dont unblock me.....if u unblock me,ill stop making acounts...simple...........ur the ones who are making something bad to worse.....stop making a big deal...im not doing anything bad or violating anything now,so i dont get it,why am i still blocked....just get over it already.......i mean well.....im not here do violate anything.......im just trying to help.......and can someone tell yalma to unblockme already......this block is so overrated.....cant u just forgive and forget.....move on people....there are other things to worry about than a stupid block...so unblock me and MOVE ON........again,i come in peace......and i have a right to contribute to wikipedia.....what happend in the past happend....the past is in the past.....now were the present......lets open a new page and start a new chapter.....star fresh..ok..deal..??.......i promise i wont violate anything.....all im asking is another chance......one last chance.....

Decline reason:

see below.

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.

Editing wikipedia is a priveledge, not a right. Using other accounts is clearly against policy and so is copyright volations (which was the reason for your original block). Calling blocks "stupid" and "overated" and saying that all of us here are "making something bad to worse" does not help your case. Unless you can prove that you have truly reformed to the extent that an admin will beleive you mean no harm and will abide by policy, your block can (and will) not be undone.--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions|Guest)} 22:35, 25 April 2008 (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).

Brexx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

IM SORRY......ok,.....theres nothing more i can say.....if u dont beleive that i wont violate again,let me prove it,unblock me and see for ur self......but u will never know if u keep blocking me.......please,im begging here......

Decline reason:

You have repeatedly lied, broken our rules and shown that you have no idea why your continued violations are a problem. Gwernol 22:46, 25 April 2008 (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.

If you really want to be unblocked then go over WP policy and decide for yourself what you did wrong. After that familiar yourself with the rules and understand wikipedia better, write something that follows guidelines and present it to an admin to show that you mean no harm. And do not continue to post unblock requests unless you want yourtalkpage to be protected making you unaccessible to wikipedia. Even if you do all that you may be unblocked only at an administrator's discrecion. If you are willing to do that, tell me and I'll consider asking an admin to see if they are willing to unblock you if you have reformed.--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions|Guest)} 22:54, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you choose to do this, you can use {{helpme}} to get an editor to help out with questions. You may also want to look over {{2nd chance}}. (Note that I am not an admin so even if you follow these instructions, I cannot unblock you myself. Someone else will have to beleive you have changed.)--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions|Guest)} 22:59, 25 April 2008 (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).

Brexx (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i did what the second chance template said [5]

Decline reason:

You copy and pasted a quote from a review at Blues & Soul Magazine and reworded another paragraph and added a single link to Mariah Carey's website. A token effort at best. Find another article to improve and make a REAL EFFORT. -- Netsnipe ► 15:21, 26 April 2008 (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.

Orphaned non-free image File:Jessicablonde.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Jessicablonde.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) 17:17, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]