User talk:Ernstfuchs

Welcome!

Hello, Ernstfuchs, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Spam

I noticed that you added the images Antichrist.JPG and Workerinthelight.JPG to several articles today. Most of your additions are not appropriate the articles. A few wikipedia users removed or adjusted your additions, and I removed most of the rest. Please do not continue to add links to these images, it is considered spam. Images must be directly referenced in articles, or have highly contextual representation in order to be included. Good practice is to looks at an article and see if it can benefit from the inclusion of an image - then go out and find one that fits well. Bad practice is to start with an image and see where on wikipedia you can put it. If you need help deciding if an image should be included, please ask me or others on wikipedia/ --Mattarata 02:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I have noticed your linking a number of artists' entries to a web site which bears no relation to the subjects. Please see Wikipedia:tutorial, external links. This looks like a commercial usage. JNW 02:52, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Juan de Flandes Spam link to your personal website, [1]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Juan de Flandes. It is considered spamming, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. Darkspots 22:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hubert van Eyck Spam, links to your personal website, [2]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Hubert van Eyck. It is considered spamming, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. Darkspots 22:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your spam campaign

Antonio: You have promoted your personal website in a flagrant fashion. You have registered website domains at namecheap.com for the following ten deceased artists, using their names +.com:

You have made those websites (sample typical of all ten) be mirror sites of your own website, [www.antonioroybal.com]. You edited the wikipedia articles for these ten artists and inserted the websites with their names and your content into their articles, so that a good-faith reader would click on an external link, thinking he was going to more information about Félicien Rops, say, and end up looking at your painting on your website. This is obviously in violation of WP:SPAM, and all your spam has been reverted. If you continue editing wikipedia in this fashion, you will undoubtedly get blocked.

Incidentially, these ten registrations are iron-clad confirmation that this account is controlled by you, Antonio Roybal; these domains are registered to an individual with a name quite similar to your own, which I will not state here, but the registration also has an email of ernstfuchs@some domain, and makes it clear that this is your "handle". You created your own wikipedia article, Antonio Roybal. With your other sockpuppet, User Talk:Vermeer1, you inserted wikilinks to your own article in a variety of different (and, arguably, not-very-related wikipedia articles), and created several other wikipedia articles just to link to your own, like Bernard Ewell and Sara roybal.

You're clearly ready to spend money (ten registrations ain't free) and time to distort wikipedia in order to promote you and your work. This is a violation of wikipedia policy, sure, but what you did with these ten internet domains is more than that, Antonio, it's dishonest. You're riding the coattails of more established artists just to get a couple of eyeballs onto your paintings. Your paintings are good, I actually like them quite a bit; you don't need to be doing this. Please stop. Darkspots 01:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response from Ernstfuchs vermeer1 to Darkspots: I am not antonio...I collect art by Ernst Fuchs, Salvador Dali, Antonio Roybal, Mark Ryden and others. I am brand new to wikipedia (so please be patient..I am being attacked as if I had been a seasoned user..only been on for a month or so.) and did not know it was against policies to add links to sites that are under construction. This user Darkspots who claims that I am antonio..will not divulge his name but has harrassed me by editing each and every edit I have made. I have not tried to revert the so called spam edits..I have left everything the same. This user keeps making claims and needs to relax. I already thanked him for his help..things are getting out of hand.(see the extensive dialogue ..who has the time to do this? I wish him the best of luck either way.

so finally...I have no hard feeling to you darkspots..I will try and watch what I do from now on. thanks

I moved your comment to the bottom of the user page, so it makes sense for everyone in the community. In answer to the time question, you've been fascinating. You've been anonymously editing wikipedia since late 2005, and you've been very creative in your many, many insertions of yourself and your paintings into the project. Of course you're Antonio Roybal--nobody else could possibly care about Antonio Roybal as much as you do. (Or have a credit card in the name of Anton Roy of Santa Fe, NM, to register all those websites, but hey, what's a little hard-and-fast evidence between friends?) If you never spam again, you'll never hear from me again. Cheers, Darkspots 22:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, have noticed the promotional insertions (spam) of this artist's paintings into many unrelated entries, and have reverted a number myself-- it hardly matters whether this is the work of the artist or a collector; either way, it is clearly promotional, and will be seen as an attempt to use Wikipedia to boost value and recognition of the work. To revert these and call for the user to desist does not constitute harassment; this is proper editing. JNW 23:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images listed for deletion

Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion if you are interested in preserving them.

Image:Antichrist.JPG

Thank you. SnowFire 06:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:CourtJesterofTheFertileCrescent.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:CourtJesterofTheFertileCrescent.JPG, which you've sourced to Antonio Roybal,. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Patronsaintoftelevision.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Patronsaintoftelevision.jpg, which you've sourced to Antonio Roybal,. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Bernardewell.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Bernardewell.JPG, which you've sourced to Antonio Roybal,. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]