User talk:Scikidus

License tagging for Image:Micah logo.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Micah logo.gif. 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. 13:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Googlism (religion)

A tag has been placed on Googlism (religion), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 14:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Googlism (religion)

A tag has been placed on Googlism (religion), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

Malzees o.0 17:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of The Church Of Google

A tag has been placed on The Church Of Google, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Toddst1 17:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

November 2007

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as The Church Of Google, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Toddst1 17:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Church Of Google

You should know that The Church Of Google was apparently discussed on WP:AfD and deleted. See the logs for that page.

Also, consider setting up user subpages of your own for articles you are creating and when an article is in good shape, copy it in to the main space (create the article at that time). This way, it won't be speedily deleted while under construction or subject to scrutiny (like this) before you're ready. Be sure to include citations from WP:Reliable Sources.

I hope this helps. Toddst1 18:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SSS-Manhattan-NY.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SSS-Manhattan-NY.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) 17:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of The Church of Google

An editor has nominated The Church of Google, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Church of Google (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I said that the votes leaned towards keep. Consensus has not to do with the votes, but also the strength of the arguments, which strongly favored the delete !votes. The Placebo Effect (talk) 23:03, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Church of the SubGenius has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Will ^(talk) 17:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Googlism

I have nominated Googlism, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Googlism (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. – iride scent 20:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Camp Micah

The article Camp Micah has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability.

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. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:39, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]