User talk:Reservoirhill

Notability of Mailbank.com Inc

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Mailbank.com Inc, by Danielarrow (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Mailbank.com Inc seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Mailbank.com Inc, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Mailbank.com Inc 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. --Android Mouse Bot 2 14:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Edwardleehoward lg.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Edwardleehoward lg.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. 18:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Hugh, oddly enough I had just scanned in my own copy of ELH's wanted poster, after procrastinating for ages, when I noticed you had added an image yourself. However, mine is higher resolution, as I scanned it directly from the poster, so I hope you don't mind me replacing it. Regards, ProhibitOnions ^(T) 10:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Mark Schneider Peace CorpsDirector.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Mark Schneider Peace CorpsDirector.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 19:24, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Coverdell

You're welcome! I learn all kinds of things just by seeing what other editors do. It was interesting to fix up, and an interesting article to read, too. (Can you believe I was only there because I clicked "Random Article" ?!?) Salamurai 18:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

J. G. McCaskey

I agree with you. J. G. McCaskey did not live in Ponca City. His office was in Pittsburgh till he moved to Fort Worth @1917. jcm (McCaskey's grandson). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcmcapital (talk • contribs) 01:17, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coverdell

Hey there. I took a picture of Senator Coverdell's statue at "The Park at Tower Place" in Atlanta(also know as "Coverdell park"). Tonight I'm going to upload it to wikipedia and put it under the Legacy section of his page. Hope ir helps.--Dr who1975 21:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks that will be great. If you can also provide a caption for the photo with the occassion and the date the photo was taken (even approximate), that would be even better.Reservoirhill 22:02, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put in a caption in but I was more concerned with the location than anything else. I took it today, 10/18/07. The occasion was that I remembered to bring my camera to work.--Dr who1975 01:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

nice photo. thanks.Reservoirhill 01:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar for your work on Peace Corps

		The Original Barnstar
		Because of your amazing work in improving the Peace Corps article, a subject near and dear to all RPCV Wikipedians, I hereby award you this original barnstar.Alabamaboy 22:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'd like to see a really first class article on Peace Corps and plan to do some work on other sections in the article soon. Reservoirhill 15:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice blog piece

on photos of artists :-) - David Gerard 11:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It was a lot of fun to get the photos of Zap Mama. Reservoirhill 15:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Marsha Hunt.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Marsha Hunt.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 08:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Fair Use justification has been provided for Image:Marsha Hunt.jpg Reservoirhill (talk) 15:12, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding edits to Danica McKellar

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Reservoirhill! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule stuffmagazine\.com, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links guidelines for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! AntiSpamBot (talk) 19:50, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Marsha Hunt.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Marsha Hunt.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) 17:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

T boones pickens

I have made a reply here. 69.148.158.112 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 06:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Imani Coppola

I undid this edit to the Imani Coppola article. You said in your edit summary: (Little Jackie's Myspace site) does not say anything about Steve Greenberg or about an album in June, 2008.). The citation I put was for the album being issued in June of 2008 and her project partner being Adam Pallin, as well her being on the label with S-Curve Records. Which is clearly stated on Little Jackie's Myspace site. As for Steve Greenberg, he has an article here on Wikiepdia explaining his ownership of S Curve, that is why it was wikified (internally linked).--Sugarcubez (talk) 09:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your reference you have cited on MySpace says that the release date is July 8, 2008 not June 2008. Glad to see you have made the correction. That's what happens when you look up an uncited reference. You find out what the real facts are.

Best Regards,

Reservoirhill (talk) 13:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peace Corps Directors

hey thanks for fixing those, i had incorrectly tagged them as Military offices. my mistake!

Imani Coppola and Little Jackie (band)

I've been looking at the two articles listed above (the second of which has recently been split out from the first). Seems to me that in the articles long chunks of copyright material are being stitching together with minimal additional input. You appear to be the editor responsible for this.

This, for me, quite clearly violates our policy on copyright violation - see Wikipedia:Non-free content, for instance. I think you need to do very substantial edits to the articles to remove the quotes; or else face the very real prospect of seeing both of them deleted as salvageable copyright violations, or made into simple stubs. I have raised the problems I perceive them to have at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems#Articles composed of multiple copyvios?; depending on the outcome of debate there, and whether or not you act to remove the quotes, they'll be listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems for deletion.

Let me give you one example. In Little Jackie (band), perhaps 90% of the paragraph starting "Coppola says that she didn't plan to return to pop" is composed of cut & paste from the cited source. Neither citing a source, nor using quotation marks, gives you the right to lift this much content. And the problem is, both articles are riddled with this technique, such that it is difficult at times to see where the original input is.

I don't have time to sort this mess out. You clearly have an interest in the subject matter, so now it's down to you: remove the quotes - by and large, all of them - or lose the articles entirely. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I note that you've used this technique on a number of other articles. They will, therefore have exactly the same problems. I'm not an expert in the area of what is & is not permissible fair use, though I am happy that the two examples I;ve looked at so far are way way over the line. Thus I direct you again to the Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems#Articles composed of multiple copyvios?, this time as the best way to get some more experienced input on the issue. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright concerns, Imani Coppola

I have blanked this article pending further investigation of copyright concerns. While it's quite obvious that your additions to this article were made in good faith and you have scrupulously identified your sources, I'm afraid that the amount and substantiality of the material that you've copied from at least some of the sources is extensive enough to consitute infringement. The non-free content guidelines provide some guidance on how and when we may use "brief" quotations. If we incorporate too many quotations from a single source, then we exceed fair use. Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited. This article, at least, needs to be revised to remove these extensive copyright violations. I am watching your page as well as the talk page of the article if you would like to discuss the matter further. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 22:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I just wanted to note here as well as at Talk:Marsha Hunt (singer and novelist) that I have addressed some over-quotation concerns in that article, for the same reason. I also wanted to commend you for your amazing research at that article! Ms. Hunt would certainly have no room to complain of its accuracy now. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Bringing the Marsha Hunt Article into Conformance with Wikipedia Standards

Dear Moonriddengirl,

I really like what you have done with the Marsha Hunt article. It looks very good. I hope you'll take a look at some of the other articles I have contributed to on Wikipedia and do the same thing.

Best Regards,

Reservoirhill (talk) 14:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and it was my pleasure. As I said, I do appreciate the time and work you put into that article. :) I'll take a look at the other articles today, including Imani Coppola, to see how best to address the quotation question. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You, Keep in mind that many of the quotations in the Biographies of Peace Corps Directors are not subject to Fair Use Restrictions

I appreciate you looking at the articles. I am good at researching subjects and organizing the material - but editing them down is not my strong point.

One thing you will want to keep in mind as you look at the biographies of Peace Corps Directors that I worked on, is that many of the quotations are not going to have a Fair Use restriction because the quotations are taken from sources which were produced by the US Federal Government and so are in the public domain. This especially applies to quotations that were taken from the Peace Corps Volunteer magazine which was produced by the US Peace Corps which is an agency of the US government. I believe this would also apply to speeches made by officials of the US Federal government and testimony made before Congress.

If you just want to ignore this issue for the moment, I can go in afterwards and add back in material that is in the public domain.

Thanks again.

Best Regards,

Reservoirhill (talk) 12:35, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks. :) I have addressed Imani Coppola, which is now a bit sprawling. As you probably noticed, some of the material had already been split to Little Jackie. I placed some of the material at Chupacabra (album). I created a new article with some of the material at The Stoop (album). I believe I may also be able to help with the use of quotations at Daniel Alomía Robles and Tania Libertad (problematic, too, because material in our articles should be in English) and Charles Murray (author). (If we use a non-English quote, we translate in the article and provide the original in a footnote. See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English_sources.) Quotations should be used sparingly in Wikipedia articles, although there are some cases where they are obviously essential. If you're talking about album reviews, brief quotes are entirely appropriate. But most of the time we need to reformulate material into our own words. It seems to me that at some points you may have been using quotes to verify your text, but this isn't necessary. The citation allows readers to check your accuracy for themselves, especially in those cases when the source is online. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:16, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Goldberg

On 27 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Philip Goldberg, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 11:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for selecting the story for Wikipedia's front page

Thank you for putting my article about Philip Goldberg on Wikipedia's front page. It is an interesting story. I have a lot of interest in America's relations with Latin America having served as a Peace Corps volunteer in Peru almost 40 years ago and I have been following Goldberg's tenure as ambassador for quite some time now. One didn't have to be particularly prescient after the Peace Corps "spying" incident at the US Embassy in Bolivia in February 2008 to see that Goldberg's tenure in Bolivia was going to end badly.

The article is interesting because it is practically a showpiece on how diplomacy should not be done. Diplomacy to my mind is the art of being able to "disagree without being disagreeable" and this is something that Goldberg obviously failed at. Time will tell if the United States' neglect of our relations with Latin America can be salvaged by a future administration. For a good example of what the right ambassador can do in a difficult situation, read the article about Peace Corps Director Jack Vaughn that I wrote a few months ago and Vaughn's success in defusing tensions after he was sent as Ambassador to Panama after the anti-American riots in that country in 1964.

If you would like some more background on Goldberg article you can find it here: "Turmoil began in Bolivia three weeks ago sparked by President Evo Morales' pledge to redistribute wealth from the east to the country's poorer highlands. Peace Corps has withdrawn all volunteers from the country because of "growing instability." Morales has thrown out US Ambassador Philip Goldberg accusing the American government of inciting the violence. This is not the first controversy surrounding Goldberg's tenure as US ambassador to Bolivia."

Best regards and thanks again for giving the Goldberg article greater exposure.

Reservoirhill (talk) 17:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanza Spalding

Hi. Please see my note at Talk:Esperanza Spalding. I appreciate your hard work and that you've provided citations for everything, but we can't quote too many sentences from any one source or it constitutes copyright infringement. Thanks. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 22:04, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've blanked another couple of your articles - Philip Goldberg & Rick Benjamin (conductor) - for the same reasons. I've looked at some of your preceding contributions and find some to be borderline. Bluntly, I appeal to you to stop using quotes in articles if at all possible. More generally, I'm not yet convinced that (what I take to be) your technique of stitching articles together from sources oft-times in the popular press makes for a good article. The tone of many of the articles I've reviewed seems breathless and tabloid, not encyclopedic. Take the Personal Life section in Esperanza Spalding. In my view, only one sentence in that whole section is worthy of note in an encyclopedia article. Clearly wikipedia is a broad church and you are entitled to disagree, but I hope you'll give due thought, first to the repeated copyright concerns you are raising, and secondly to questions of tone and the appropriateness of content. I will, as time permits, look back through the rest of your work and raise such concerns as I find. I hope you will take the opportunity to revisit your work and recheck for possible copyright violations, and for tone and content. Finally, I know that concerns about copyright violations in relation to the use of quotations has already been brought to your attention. I am, therefore, very sorry indeed to see that you have have not heeded the concerns raised. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed a few quotes from Mae Jemison so that there wouldn't be too many quotes from any one article. I agree with Tagishsimon: Wikipedia's style tends to be more brief and factual and less human-interest. There might be a different wiki or website that would be more open to the type of article you want to write. When writing Wikipedia articles, I suggest making them shorter and sticking to only the bare facts. Someone might come along later and delete large parts of your articles as being unencyclopedic and including unnecessary detail. Wikipedia is supposed to be a summary, not to include every detail. Sorry about that! As Tagishsimon says, there's some difference of opinion about exactly where to draw the line. ☺Coppertwig(talk) 23:45, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. It went to very great lengths setting out why there was not a copyright problem, and but fatally undercut by Moonriddengirl finding obvious copyright violations in the main text, let alone the quote. I note too that you've studiously avoided commenting on the rest of your copyvios and on the matter of your very tabloid style. All somewhat self exculpating. The bottom line for me is that these are very serious issues; I urge you to consider them and then address them, since you clearly have the ability, but to my way of thinking are misdirecting yourself. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:38, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Responses

Hello, Reservoirhill. You have new messages at moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

And again. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:51, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Standing Bear.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Standing Bear.jpg.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the image description page states the source and copyright status of the derivative work, it only names the creator of the original work without specifying the status of their copyright over the work.

Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the original image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, 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. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. Thanks again for your cooperation. Stefan2 (talk) 00:44, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of List of returned Peace Corps Volunteers

The article List of returned Peace Corps Volunteers has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

pseudo-memorial. Vast majority of these aren't notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:27, 12 June 2014 (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) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Better source request for File:Edwardleehoward sm.jpg

Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:

File:Edwardleehoward sm.jpg

You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain, search engine, pinboard, aggregator, or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:27, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Mark Schneider Peace CorpsDirector.jpg

The file File:Mark Schneider Peace CorpsDirector.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious 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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Mark Gearan.gif

The file File:Mark Gearan.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious 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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Edwardleehoward sm.jpg

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

unused, low-res, no obvious 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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Patti Austin at Rams Head2.jpg

The file File:Patti Austin at Rams Head2.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious 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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Patti Austin at Rams Head.jpg

The file File:Patti Austin at Rams Head.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious 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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alva Oklahoma Mural.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Alva Oklahoma Mural.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 22:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Mae Jemison Mission Specialist.jpg

The file File:Mae Jemison Mission Specialist.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Low-res crop of File:Female Astronauts - GPN-2004-00023.jpg, already on Commons.

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. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 20:34, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with File:Ninja from the Go Team.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Ninja from the Go Team.jpg.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F4 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:56, 18 November 2023 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 20:56, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]