User talk:Lindsaybabay

License tagging for Image:Dmfanlist1.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Dmfanlist1.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. 01:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Dpaanabker.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Dpaanabker.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. cohesion 23:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you say you made this image, what do you mean? Are you the photographer? - cohesion 23:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Dmfanlist1.JPG

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Dmfanlist1.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. cohesion 01:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kendall Gaveck

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Kendall Gaveck, 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). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:12, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Nomination: Daniella Morris

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, but all Wikipedia articles must meet our criteria for inclusion (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Since it does not seem to me that Daniella Morris meets these criteria, I have started a discussion about whether this article should be kept or deleted.

Your opinion on whether this article meets the inclusion criteria is welcome. Please contribute to the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniella Morris. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them.

Discussions such as these usually last five days. In the meantime, you are free to edit the content of the article. Please do not remove the "articles for deletion" template (the box at the top). When the discussion has concluded, an administrator will consider all comments and decide whether or not to delete the article. — coel acan — 08:34, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your question, our notability requirements are that "a topic is notable if it has been the subject of non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." So most of the sources in the Daniella Morris article don't help notability, because they are written directly by her or her agent or are pay-for-publish vanity press sources. And IMDb pages aren't considered indicators of notability, because IMDb tries to have a page on everyone who's been in front of a camera, whereas our notability guideline for persons is more stringent than IMDb's. — coel acan — 18:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Oh Ok! I think I understand now. What can be considered a good reference? I think I may have deleted the articles on Kendall Gaveck and Daniella.

Your question can be best answered by looking at WP:RS and also at WP:ATT. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 02:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]