User talk:Red marquis/Archive 1

Image tagging for Image:Gpb_diatto1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gpb_diatto1.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 10:08, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ferrari 156 F1 page

Thanks for the work you have done on the Ferrari 156 F1 page - previously the Ferrari 156 Sharknose page. I've noticed some wording that would appear to be from the Ultimatecarpage.com page and therefore contravene the Wikipedia copyright policy. Perhaps you might wish to comment on the Talk page? --Xagent86 (Talk | contribs) 08:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:LaVey.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:LaVey.jpg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Diatto8vubyzagato.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Diatto8vubyzagato.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 03:43, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:DiattoZagatoPress1.jpg

I have tagged Image:DiattoZagatoPress1.jpg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Videmus Omnia 03:43, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Maseraticoupe 1.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Maseraticoupe 1.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Longhardroadoutofhell.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Longhardroadoutofhell.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Begottenscreenshotrm.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Begottenscreenshotrm.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MoS and image sizes

When you specify an image size for thumbnails, you override the users default setting. The MOS explains the few cases where this could be set to override the users setting. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:52, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:2010-Porsche-Panamera.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:2010-Porsche-Panamera.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. Hektor (talk) 10:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I blocked you for a week for repeated copyright violations after plenty of warning. Don't upload those pictures. Secret ^account 16:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked? you have to be kidding me! What copyright or law did I violate? Those pictures of the Panamera, 911 and Cayman are factory produced images intended for promotion, distribution and fair use by the public (most especially in instances where it is used for educational reasons, such as here in Wikipedia). All this means, I violated no copyright laws and those images were used legally.

- Red marquis (talk) 12:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Internet Brands

When I checked yesterday before reverting the sentence, the site was working fine. It's down right now. As I understand it, they've been having some denial of service attacks. Regardless, though, we can't put anything in the article that hasn't been reported in reliable sources. Powers ^T 12:37, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Ridernyc (talk) 08:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of previously published material to our articles as you apparently did to Antichrist Superstar. Please cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. DKqwerty (talk) 15:03, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did to Holy Wood (In the Shadow of the Valley of Death), you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. DKqwerty (talk) 15:03, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Abum My Fever Broke cover.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Abum My Fever Broke cover.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ww2censor (talk) 15:01, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Transylvanian Regurgitations.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Transylvanian Regurgitations.jpg. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:36, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mechanical Animals Tour

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Mechanical Animals Tour, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Mechanical Animals (tour). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:34, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. I did not mistakenly duplicate articles. I am in the midst of redirecting articles and generally sprucing up the pages as Marilyn Manson fans have done such a terrible job managing the articles.-Red marquis (talk) 17:38, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Mechanical Animals (tour) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 20:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Objections on the Holy Wood (In the Shadow of the Valley of Death) assessment

I'm not sure where to put this so I'll do it here. While I agree with a few of your points, I have reservations about several.

Track listing is unsourced.

-Who sources track listings? Not one album article on Wikipedia do. Not The Fame, Confessions on a Dance Floor or Goodies (album).

Tacklisting must be sourced, i did not write those articles, articles must contain a tracklising source like Cannibal (EP) which i did write. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me -

Addressed.

What makes metroactive.com a reliable reference?

-What makes it not? According to Metroactive's 'pedia page it has won several accolades including the National Newspaper Association's 1995 contest and the California Newspaper Publishers Association Better Newspapers Awards - unless it has received criticism or controversy about the fairness or reliability of its reporting. But I wouldn't know about that since I live in the Philippines. Please, correct me if I am mistaken.

Concept section is very fanfacty and overly detailed. Most of the information does not relate to the album and is close to being copyright infringement.

-I'll give you the first half. It IS overly detailed but it is necessary to give a proper assessment of the album's cultural importance. And it IS culturally important since it constituted the counterargument and observations of the person nearly everyone blamed the Columbine massacre on. Again, how, and particularly which, information do not relate to the album. Where am I close to infringing copyright? By linking his interviews and essays? That's not copyright infringement. Not unless Marilyn Manson copyrights every word he utters.

What i mean by copyright infrigment is i noticed there is alot of similar words and close paraphrasing. Should be re worded.

Massive amount of Dab links please see here.

addressed

There should be a chart performance section, and a critical reception section not a reception section. Also review do not go in the info box, they go under Critical reception.

Agreed. Will address asap.

Thanks for the reply. Are there anymore issues that need addressing? I really want to see this article eventually featured on the front page. -Red marquis (talk) 10:50, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Holy Wood (In the Shadow of the Valley of Death)

Hi! This article has been nominated for a GA. Were you contacted before the user nominated it? You are the top contributor with 500+ edits, he's too far away with just 9. Novice7 (talk) 13:56, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No I wasn't. I had it nominated before but I don't think it is complete yet or up to snuff to become GA or FA. It's still missing numerous key components and need further fleshing out. -Red marquis (talk) 14:24, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have the right to ask the nominator why he nominated it. As I said, you are the top contributor. If you feel it's not ready, you can ask him to withdraw it for the moment. You've done a good job on the article, I must say :) Novice7 (talk) 14:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked over the guidelines for GA nomination again, I must say I can't think of anything right now that it doesn't comply with. Admittedly, I was using FA guidelines to gauge to article's completeness. I'll go ahead and let Salgado96 have this reviewed for GA status. -Red marquis (talk) 14:34, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The GA guidelines don't say so, but FA guidelines do. Anyway, I'm sure the article will pass. Just to let you know, that's all. Regards, Novice7 (talk) 14:41, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me. Can you add a "Composition" section to the article, please? By the way, hi!'| () () `'/ I> (talk) 01:13, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I'm working on it but I'm still trying to secure details on several sources. It's very difficult trying to ascertain back issues of magazines from 10 years ago on the web. -Red marquis (talk) 07:17, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for File:Holy Wood promotional poster 2000.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Holy Wood promotional poster 2000.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

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

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 10:05, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Seder

Thank you for your helplful edits to Sam Seder. If you want to be even more helpful, you can describe your changes in the Edit Summary before you save it. --Nbauman (talk) 00:13, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]