User talk:Erikespe
DesertSky85451 00:12, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
License tagging for Image:Vimologo.gif
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Vimologo.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:11, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Orphaned fair use image (Image:Vimologo.jpg)
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Vimologo.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).
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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 02:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. IrishGuy talk 02:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Vimologo.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Vimologo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
January 2013
[edit]Thanks so much for continually editing the Lance Armstrong page to include your perspective on his current situation. My advice is to go to the talk page to discuss what you'd like to include since your edits have been removed more than once by more than one editor. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- Honestly, you're wasting your time trying to make such substantial and controversial edits without gaining a consensus. It seems your recent "work" on Armstrong has already been removed. Try talking about it first. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:09, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
3RR warning re: Lance Armstrong
[edit]Your recent editing history at Lance Armstrong shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:26, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
The article GetInsured has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Blatantly promotional article, content written by a series of SPAs. Grandiose claims, but very little RS evidence; what few third-party sources appear to be lightly-churned press releases. Talk page discussion is about the company's perennial lack of actual notability. WP:BEFORE shows no better sourcing than already exists. Tagged since 2014; there's no reasonable prospect of this article improving organically.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. David Gerard (talk) 18:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)