User talk:PaulGreasley

The article Taylor Morgan has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki 17:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lotus 96(T)

Hi. I noticed your recent updates to Lotus 96 and creation of Lotus 96T. I've started a discussion here in which you may care to participate. Regards. DH85868993 03:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. Please comment with your opinion about if the two articles be merged. Royalbroil 12:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response on the merge request. Since you're the expert, please merge in some former text from the old Lotus 96 article (found at Talk:Lotus 96T) into the current article. I have moved the categories and Lotus navigation box into the article. For future reference, note that you should add and incorporate text into the article and not just replace the article. Some good information was lost. Royalbroil 13:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello - I totally agree with your sentiments. However, apart from the mention of one of the design team the article was mostly incorrect. However, I will not go into technicalities. I appreciate your views and will adhere to the wikipedia codes from now on.

Image copyright problem with Image:112(2).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:112(2).jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Lotus109.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lotus109.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Teresamay.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Teresamay.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. 13:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Taylor Morgan

I've nominated Taylor Morgan, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Taylor Morgan 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/Taylor Morgan and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Taylor Morgan 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. east.718 14:13, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Taylor Morgan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as articles for deletion. If you can indicate how Taylor Morgan is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template {{hangon}} underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:Taylor Morgan saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions. Videmus Omnia 14:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial use of Image:TaylorMorgan.jpg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:TaylorMorgan.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:TaylorMorgan.jpg is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only" which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3).

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:TaylorMorgan.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 14:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Taylor.jpg

Hi Paul - I noticed that, on the above image, you stated that you received permission from the performer to upload the image. I'm attempting to verify this - did you receive it by e-mail? Videmus Omnia 15:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - did you want me to post the email here? Or forward it to you?

Please forward the e-mail to the WP:OTRS folks. The procedure, and an explanation of the process, can be found here. Thanks! Videmus Omnia 13:50, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Taylor Morgan

I've nominated Taylor Morgan, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Taylor Morgan 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/Taylor Morgan (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Taylor Morgan 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. Sancho 19:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello PaulGreasley! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. 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 these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 50 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Belinda Earl - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Gérard Ducarouge - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012

Hello, I'm Redrose64. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Dormans railway station, but you didn't provide a reliable source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, --Redrose64 (talk) 16:54, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Redrose,

Thank you for your message regarding Dormans Station.

I cannot provide a source for this. Dormansland, as you are aware, is a village in Surrey. Currently to date only one book has ever been written on the village which sadly does not mention the ghost incident.

I have lived in the village for the past 20 years and this is one of two stories that is talked about (along with the Beacon Hill Beast).

Im sorry this is so vague.

Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by PaulGreasley (talk • contribs) 17:59, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, personal knowledge does not meet the policy on verifiability. Reports of supernatural activity are often disbelieved, so it's very important to give a source, otherwise such reports are likely to be considered WP:HOAX.

Compare the description of a ghost at Carew, Pembrokeshire, which wasn't entered from personal knowledge, but from a news report. If you look at the relevant edit, you'll see that the text (which ends "... has been reported before.") is followed by a <ref>...</ref> tag, within which are the details of the source. In this case, it's formatted using the {{cite news}} template, but the formatting is relatively unimportant: what is important is that the name of the newspaper is given, as are the title of the story and date of publication. It's available online, so a web address is useful too - that was added with this edit. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:05, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of DHS Bolts for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article DHS Bolts 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/DHS Bolts 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. Tyros1972 Talk 11:50, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 06:10, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Rudy Thomann

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 Rudy Thomann 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 a real person or group of people that does not credibly 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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the deleting administrator. Modussiccandi (talk) 16:33, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]