User talk:Mollylou12

Sirs: I already cleared this matter with you a year ago. Want to see the email chain. Let me know. Thanks, Molly

Molly Louise Shepard

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Molly Louise Shepard, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://members.tripod.com/~MollyLou/index.html, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), you can comment to that effect on Talk:Molly Louise Shepard. Then you should do one of the following:

Make a note on the original website that re-use is permitted under the GFDL and state at Talk:Molly Louise Shepard where we can find that note; or
Send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! --Robth^Talk 00:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sirs:

I've already corrected the listing of this matter. Please remove these messages.

Thanks, Molly B.

Image copyright problem with Image:100 2401.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:100 2401.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. Lego K^ontribs T^alkM 07:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image credit

Credit for Wikipedia images is given on the image's page, not on the articles where this image is used, where that information is for all encyclopedic purposes irrelevant. Also, I'd notice your comments more quickly if you left them on my talk page. They are good images, but inserting image creators in articles (unless they are relevant to the topic at hand) is not normally done. Circeus (talk) 06:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Los Angeles landmarks

Hi Mollylou12 -- I've noticed your several new articles and photos of Los Angeles landmarks. Nice work with both the pics and the writing!

As Circeus(sp?) mentions above, it seems not to be conventional to include photo credits in wikipedia articles, and i have not been including self-credits for my own. Also, with some or all of your photos, you have indicated "(c)" and your name, but you when you release them under Creative Commons or any other free license that is appropriate for Wikipedia, you do not keep copyright over that image version. Wikipedia does not allow use of copyrighted images, in fact, besides for "fair use" exceptions, so it is confusing to see (c) in image captions in the articles or on the photo page.

I wonder if you have visited List of Registered Historic Places in Los Angeles, a list-article that i helped develop recently, reflecting many recent photos and new articles by Cbl62, especially. I am also drafting a similar list-table of Los Angeles Historic-Cultural Monuments. Hmm, perhaps i should get that out in wikipedia mainspace, so others feel more free to add to it....

Anyhow, keep up the good work! Cheers, doncram (talk) 20:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, Doncram, when using a CC license, you keep copyright (as you do for GFDL-released material, but unlike when released in the public domain). You just can't assert control over further uses that do not violate the license. I'm not clear whether there is an actual policy or Manual of Style entry on including image credit in articles, but I know none of those ever flew through a Featured Content nomination, so it might as well be in the MoS for all practical purposes. Circeus (talk) 21:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. I thought technically that with GFDL you could use your own photo again, and that other version could be copyrighted, but did not think the version released under GFDL was still copyrighted. Whatever the semantics of it are, I think it is confusing to post "(c)" on images released under Creative Commons, it implies that the photo is regular, copyrighted. So if (c) is ever used here, then also there should be mention of CC or GFDL or whatever is the free-type license (which there is in the photo page itself). I browsed in wp:MOS and eventually find my way to Wikipedia:Captions, which gives examples of photo captions. No examples or mention of using image credits, ever. I've never seen photo credits in articles about historic sites. doncram (talk) 00:08, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: Image:Easternstandard cropped by mlsb.jpg

Image:Easternstandard cropped by mlsb.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:PD-PCL. Commons is a repository of free media that can be used on all MediaWiki wiki's. The image(s) will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:PD-PCL]]. Note that this is an automated message. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from The X Factor Fan Site, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. NtheP (talk) 19:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:The-x-factor-fan-site-logo.png

Thank you for uploading File:The-x-factor-fan-site-logo.png. 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 file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:13, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Mollylou12! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 157 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Molly Louise Shepard - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:58, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:18, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Molly Louise Shepard for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Molly Louise Shepard is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Molly Louise Shepard until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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.

Ploni (talk) 13:17, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello:

My Wikipedia page has been up for sixteen years. It is a surprise to me that, all of a sudden, Ploni doesn’t consider me worthy enough to retain my listing, even though I am an off-Broadway playwright, who has been published internationally and had a film made of her work. I’m sorry I’m not accomplished or famous enough for Ploni. Perhaps the fact that my daughter is now in a television show might make me famous/accomplished adjacent enough for Ploni’s standards. Who knows? Very frustrating as it is probably the case that I don’t stand a chance of retaining my listing, no matter what I say.

Interesting to me, just in studying human nature, that this is how some folks spend their time, deleting listings of artists whom they deem not accomplished or famous enough.

Best regards, Molly Mollylou12 (talk) 05:22, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Molly Louise, please see my reply to your message on my Talk page. –Ploni (talk) 11:44, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:MollPic11503.jpg

The file File:MollPic11503.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Uploaded for Molly Louise Shepard. 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¦» 06:35, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I really want to thank you and Ploni for so aggressively erasing my accomplishments so thoroughly from Wikipedia. It has caused me terrible upset. I hope some Internet stranger works as diligently to erase all of your accomplishments from the Web while your a senior, still alive, but not quite defunct, yet. Well done. I can assure you, it’s quite depressing. You must be so proud. :/ Mollylou12 (talk) 14:10, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

^you’re Mollylou12 (talk) 14:11, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]