Hello, Greener grasses, 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 ask your question there. Again, welcome! Seraphimblade04:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article TeamAWESOME!, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Seraphimblade04:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Saw your userpage creation, and hope that you don't get too intimidated. It can be a learning curve, but we do try to help out those that are newer to this here, and to be a reasonable bunch in general. :) Please feel free to ask at User talk:Seraphimblade or the help desk if you run into any trouble. Seraphimblade07:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey there, just noting that the "wow" response was not from Slim_Virgin (talk·contribs) but from 90.192.200.27, and thus anonymous. Looks like Slim_Virgin (talk·contribs) has not yet responded to your query. I'm new to Wikipedia myself, and not fully conversant with the policies and procedures, but since Slim_Virgin (talk·contribs) is an admin, it seems like expecting an answer from her is reasonable.
Looks like the next step is Mediation or Arbitration. For pointers, if you are not aware of this section of the Administrators page, see the Dealing with grievances section of the Administrators page.
We are out here, yes. I think that admins tend to rely on things like Deletion log comments and forget that not everyone knows that they're there. I also don't really understand how Slim_Virgin (talk·contribs)'s actions jibe with Wikipedia is not censored (which is official Wikipedia policy), though I'm sure that the deletion of Darvon Cocktail could be argued to be required to protection against liability lawsuits. You may need to RfC this issue if you don't get a response from Slim Virgin (talk·contribs). I don't know how busy she is or how important she thinks the question. --MalcolmGin21:31, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A sentence in parens is all you can expect from the deletion logs, which is why I think in this case that may be insufficient. If you search the deletion logs for "Darvon", you get other admins' actions on pages with that word in the name, and it looks like Slim Virgin (talk·contribs) isn't the only admin who's ever taken that action on pages with "Darvon" in them. I think there's more to the story, but unless someone tells us where to look or we happen on it somewhere, it'll be difficult to find it. I'll do a little more poking at it, and let you know if I find anything out. --MalcolmGin13:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm learning a lot too. So far, I can't find any PubMed citations that use the phrase "Darvon Cocktail". I'd misremembered, and will note that on the discussion with Guy (talk·contribs), but I still need to get to a medical library or just a library proper. It seems to me that there are periodicals that might be indexed and might "count" as far as a secondary reference (i.e. a citation that presumably is not narrating events as they happen, but per some form of other research, that is not a blog but a print periodical), like Rolling Stone or some tabloid or something that would turn the title of the article itself into something that's not "original research". That's the real challenge, and something Guy (talk·contribs) is so far totally spot on about. Without moving the title itself from original research, the best you're likely to be able to do is write about "Darvon cocktails" in the Darvon article, and even that phrase might get struck if there isn't a sufficiently valid citation. --MalcolmGin13:14, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot06:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot06:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Promo2.jpg. 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. 20:08, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Promo2.jpg, which you've sourced to Sarah Cass. 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 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) 04:47, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TeamAWESOME! until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
wikimedia.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.
wikimedia.org.
