User talk:Glowah

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Glowah, 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 messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! JD554 (talk) 10:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for reverting your recent experiment with the page The Killers (band). Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you. JD554 (talk) 10:02, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Salter school.gif

Thanks for uploading File:Salter school.gif. 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) 02:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Straighterline.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Godimrm (talk) 06:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for File:Burck Smith2.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Burck Smith2.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:06, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Straighterline.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 07:57, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! Need a hand?

Hello! Glowah, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! SarahStierch (talk) 07:57, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation in Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Straighterline

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions to the page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Straighterline, but for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition was deleted under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text—which means allowing other people to modify it—then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later, and the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License." You may also e-mail or mail the Foundation to release the content. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more.

While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here. You can also leave a message on my talk page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Responding from the message you left on my talk page (and I know it's been a while; I've been near inactive for a time) you can go ahead and make the article again in the same way, as an articles for creation submission, and yes, citing entirely independent third party sources is crucial, but I hope you understand the templated message I left above. We cite sources to show where we got information—to show the subject is notable and the information verifiable—but you must write in your own words (you can use limited quotations, of course, but they must be in quotation marks and be immediately followed by an inline citation). Be careful of close paraphrasing as well. Because you used text that was directly copied and pasted, the article needed to be deleted, but if you repost without this problem included, I will gladly look over the resubmission. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:07, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation in Burck Smith

Hi again. I'm not sure why we are miscommunicating but we apparently are. I looked at the resubmission and it was again a patent copyright violation. I'm not sure how to say it more clearly. You cannot copy and paste copyrighted text. You can use relatively short quotes of copyrighted text, placed in quotation marks thus showing it is someone else's words, followed by an inline citation but that's about the limit of use of copyrighted text. The resubmission was full of directly copied and pasted text, and the material was not placed in quotation marks. To be absolutely clear, even if this copied material was placed in quotation marks, this would have been far too much copyrighted text to meet fair use, so please don't resubmit with the same type of text with just quotation marks added. Again, you must write in your own words, citing sources to to show the subject is notable and that the information is verifiable. There were other problems with the text, e.g., that it was not written in the neutral tone required of an encyclopedia and read as promotional, but that might have been solved. Copyright violations that persist through every revision, though, simply mandate deletion.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Burck Smith2.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:34, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Holly Tucker has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Holly Tucker. Thanks! SwisterTwister talk 01:29, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Holly Tucker (March 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Innisfree987 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Right now only one of sources cited here is "independent" (the NPR sources)--all the rest are written by Tucker herself or institutions affiliated with her, like her publisher. To qualify for an entry in the encyclopedia, an entry needs "significant" sourcing in independent, reliable secondary sources, like book reviews as SwisterTwister suggested. The notability link above can also give you more details on what to look to add before resubmitting. Hope that helps! Innisfree987 (talk) 03:25, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Holly Tucker and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Innisfree987 (talk) 03:25, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Glowah, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Innisfree987 (talk) 03:25, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Holly Tucker concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Holly Tucker, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 20:55, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Holly Tucker

Hello, Glowah. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Holly Tucker".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Legacypac (talk) 02:41, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Burck Smith2.jpg

The file File:Burck Smith2.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Uploaded for Burck Smith. No other use.

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 01:34, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]