User talk:Notlearninglatin
License tagging for Image:Random rules.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Random rules.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. 21:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Random_rules.jpg
[edit]Thank you for uploading Image:Random_rules.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. -- SteinbDJ · talk · contributions 15:44, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Giddy-up, helicopter!, 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. 172.147.54.62 17:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Giddy-up, helicopter!
[edit]I've nominated Giddy-up, helicopter!, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Giddy-up, helicopter! satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giddy-up, helicopter! and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Giddy-up, helicopter! during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. - iridescenti (talk to me!) 09:23, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- what does "this article must not be blanked mean?" i am also confused about the prior message someone left me in regards to deletion-- it wasn't grammatically correct and it also said that the notice could be taken down. this message to you actually isn't the most coherent thing i've ever written but it's 5:30 in the morning here.— Preceding unsigned comment added by notlearninglatin (talk • contribs)
- The above is an automatically generated message when an article's nominated for deletion. Someone else put the {{prod}} (uncontested deletion) marker on the page which you removed; removing it means it goes to Articles for Deletion discussions as a procedural move, for other users to decide whether it should be kept or deleted. Click here to see the debate on it, which you're welcome to add to to defend why the band warrants having their own article. The discussion will stay up for five days; you (or anyone else) can expand/improve the article at any time to help it fit the criteria to be kept. The "do not blank" means what it sounds like - don't delete the article until the discussion's finished, in case it's decided to keep it.
- It would probably be useful to read WP:BAND, to see exactly what an entry on a band needs to include to be kept on Wikipedia.
- If the page does get deleted, don't take it as a personal insult! Most (if not all) people here have at least one of their first few articles deleted or nominated for deletion. Take the opportunity to save the article text or move it to your userpage; that way, if it does get deleted you can work on it at your leisure until you think it's ready for re-adding to Wikipedia. Oh, and don't think anyone said, but welcome... - iridescenti (talk to me!) 09:45, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Further to the above, I've added a couple of citations to newspapers to give it the "multiple non-trivial published sources" that are the primary criteria for remaining on Wikipedia. The article's still a bit weak (when you take out the influences etc there's not a lot of information about the band. I'll keep an eye on this article until the deletion discussion's concluded one way or another, and tidy up anything you add, if necessary, to meet Wikipedia standards. - iridescenti (talk to me!) 10:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Image:Band_in_atlanta.jpg listed for deletion
[edit]An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Band_in_atlanta.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 15:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
