User talk:Dallas666bolen

Notability of Satus (WA)

A tag has been placed on Satus (WA) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, 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 assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Eatcacti (talk) 06:26, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Satus (band)

A tag has been placed on Satus (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, 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 assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Eatcacti (talk) 06:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

November 2007

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Satus, Washington. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Eatcacti (talk) 06:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles that you have created yourself, as you did with Satus (WA). If you do not believe the article should be deleted, then please place {{hangon}} on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Eatcacti (talk) 06:33, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Satus.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Satus.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 01:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jusjih 01:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Gorgoroth 18.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Gorgoroth 18.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) 21:56, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Gorgoroth, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Gorgoroth was changed by Dallas666bolen (c) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2007-12-24T18:03:15+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 22:03, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits to Gorgoroth

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Dallas666bolen! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule photobucket\.com, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links guidelines for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! AntiSpamBot (talk) 22:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding Infernus as a member of the band. If you read the talk page (or the article itself), you will see that he is no longer a member, and the name "Gorgoroth" belongs to King and Gaahl. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 22:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not you were told "personally" is irrelevant. The point is that the patent office has ruled in favour of Gaahl and King. Regain Records may have sided with him, but the law is with Gaahl. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 22:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's tough whether or not you consider it to be "bull shit". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, based on acurrate sources, not a place to spread rumour and heresay, which I would call bull shit. Also, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 22:26, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have no evidence to support these so called "facts", and so it must be written off as unsourced and potentially untrue. See WP:CITE. And again, please sign your posts. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 22:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By typing "~~~~" after your message. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 22:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding Infernus into the page unless you have a reliable source, you are now in violation of the Three Revert Rule, and if you continue to do so without discussing it on the talk page or adding a reliable source, you will be banned from editing. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 22:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 2007

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Gorgoroth. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Thedjatclubrock :) ^(T/C) 22:15, 24 December 2007 (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) 22:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Gorgoroth. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. —slakr^\ talk / 23:17, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

January 2008

Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ≈ The Haunted Angel 22:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to Gorgoroth, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ≈ The Haunted Angel 23:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the point in deleting a free image of one member of Gorgoroth, it left the article without any image at all. Hervegirod (talk) 22:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]