User talk:Lokiterry

Welcome!

Hello, Lokiterry, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Tinkatolli, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Funnyfarmofdoom _{(talk to me)} 17:11, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Tinkatolli

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Tinkatolli requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Funnyfarmofdoom _{(talk to me)} 17:11, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The only way

for your article to survive is if you show it passes WP:WEB and add references that comply with WP:RS to prove it. The game's site can be an external link, but it cannot be used to show notability. You need reliable independent sources. Not blogs, forums, wikis, Facebook etc, wordpress pages etc, YouTube etc, AboutUs etc, and so on and so forth. You need non-editable sources - a BBC page is OK so long as it's not a blog type page. Good newspapers are OK - same thing, not blog sections or letters. Get the idea? If you've got sources, put them in. Don't worry about inline citations - just stick them in at the end. If they're good, they can be sorted by the wikignomes later. Peridon (talk) 18:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BTW How much fun it is doesn't count. It's outside coverage that does. Not fair? Maybe. It's what has been decided here. Peridon (talk) 18:44, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The page Tinkatolli has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under the criteria for speedy deletion, for two reasons. Firstly, the content of the page appeared to be advertising, which only promoted something, and which was unlikely to be suitable for an article (or at best would need a fundamental rewrite). Wikipedia is not a medium for promotion of anything, whether a company, product, group, service, person, religious or political belief, or anything else. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

Secondly, for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images copied from other web sites or printed material. See 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 there are methods of releasing copyright to Wikipedia. I can give you information how to do that if you like, but my advice is that doing so would be a waste of your time, as the content would simply be deleted again as promotional.

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. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, JamesBWatson - I've left an area on your talk page and apologise for using sentences in areas, I had a mixup and I'm sincerely sorry for that. If you could allow the page back, I will make all the immediate changes that is needed to remove sentences from other websites and place it in my own words, my fault, please give me the chance to change this. This isn't for the promotion of the website, it's showing information about what this is about, similarly to other virtual worlds e.g. MiniMonos & Club Penguin. Please allow me to change this. Lokiterry (talk) 13:05, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following was written as a reply to your message on my talk page, and it refers to the text of that message. Normally, I reply to a message on the talk page where it is posted, to avoid fragmenting discussion, but since you have also posted a message to me here, and since it concerns you more than me, I am posting my reply here.

First of all, you say "sorry for this", but no apologies are necessary. I am sure that everything you did was done in good faith, and all of us, when we first start to edit Wikipedia, don't know all the policies, guidelines, etc, so there is no blame to be attached to anyone who perfectly innocently does things which they then find are not considered acceptable. I should think very few of us manage to do any significant editing of Wikipedia without making some sort of mistakes.

There are several issues here. I will try to deal with the ones that I think are most important.

You say that permission has been given for use of the content. However we can't take the unsubstantiated word of just anyone who chooses to create a Wikipedia account that they have copyright permission. This is not just some kind of pedantry: unfortunately, people do come here and lie about such issues. Just yesterday I was looking at the case of someone who has over several years repeatedly lied about copyright permission, forged evidence of such permission, and used multiple Wikipedia accounts to do so. I am giving you, below, information about how to give copyright permission to Wikipedia. However, I still suggest that that may not be a useful way forward, for several reasons. Granting permission under the relevant licensing terms will mean that permission is give for anyone at all, anywhere in the world, to reuse the text, as it is or modified however they like, for any purpose, including their own commercial use, subject to minimal requirements, essentially no more than providing a link to show where they got the content from. In practice, there are very few organisations or businesses that are willing to license their web-site content so freely, and it is very unlikely that an organisation which puts "© Tinkatolli ApS" without further qualification at the bottom of its web pages will be willing to do so. There is no such thing as licensing text for use only on Wikipedia, because anything posted to any Wikipedia page is automatically released under free licensing terms. Also, even if Tinkatolli ApS is willing to change its copyright licensing terms in that way, it is doubtful whether there will be any point in doing so. The result would be that reuse by anyone anywhere in the world would be allowed for ever, just so that the content would be posted temporarily to a userspace page to be edited to make it less promotional. (Contrary to what many people think, it is not possible for me even to restore the information to a user-space page to be edited without copyright permission. Knowingly posting copyright-infringing content to a page on a publicly viewable website is illegal, and having the word "user" in the title at the top of the page doesn't change that.) A much better way forward is for me to email the content to you, so that you can edit it off Wikipedia. However, please note that if you choose to take this option, it must not be posted to any page at all on Wikipedia while copyright-infringing content is still there. Let me know if you want me to email it to you.

You wrote "The first reason you had mentioned it looks like for promotion only, it isn't, it's well known and has a big audience..." I am not at all sure what you think "promotion" means, but it has nothing whatever to do with how well known the subject is. I should think that, at the last United States presidential election campaign, Barack Obama was one of the best known people in the world, and certainly better known than Tinkatolli, but that does not detract from the fact that he and his supporters mounted a massive campaign to promote him. Such language as, for example "Tinkatolli inspires kids to create, move, think and give in the game and away from the computer" is unambiguously promotional, and the whole article was permeated by such promotional writing.

Finally, as I said I would do, I will give you information on how to give Wikipedia copyright permission. As I have already explained, I don't recommend taking that option, but it is up to you if you wish to.

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 may 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.

JamesBWatson (talk) 09:24, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the rapid response James and I really appreciate it, being new to articles I was misguided and all I wanted to do was in good faith, thank you for clearing this.

You said "" A much better way forward is for me to email the content to you, so that you can edit it off Wikipedia. However, please note that if you choose to take this option, it must not be posted to any page at all on Wikipedia while copyright-infringing content is still there. Let me know if you want me to email it to you." -- If it's possible, could you email me the content of what was on that page, so I can change it without it being on Wikipedia, it won't be posted anywhere on Wikipedia while copyright-infringing content is there, I promise. Is it also possible (when I get the email from you) for the Tinkatolli staff and I to review the article and to ensure it deals with the issues you've stated and when we've completed the article for publishing, to show it to you via email or somewhere without publishing on Wikipedia, so this process doesn't happen again, I'm pretty sure reviewing the article with the Tinkatolli staff, this wouldn't happen again but just to make sure, it's fine. Thank you for your time, I really appreciate it. Lokiterry (talk) 11:36, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have emailed the content of the article to you. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:02, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Tinkatolli Logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tinkatolli Logo.png. 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 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:52, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]