User talk:Snoopy1239

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Shadow1 (talk) 19:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Black belt poker

A tag has been placed on Black belt poker 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 web content, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. RadioFan (talk) 16:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Dana immanuel2.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Dana immanuel2.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, 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 files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 08:24, 23 June 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:24, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Dana immanuel.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Dana immanuel.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, 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 files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 08:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dana immanuel

This topic doesn't seem to at all meet the notability threshold of WP:Music. It may be speedily deleted, unless you can quickly come up with some independent sources showing that the topic is encyclopedic (this is not a comment on the subject herself, or her talent, at all). Gwen Gale (talk) 09:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After further review, I've speedy deleted the page, since it's a wholly unreferenced BLP which makes no claims to notability (WP:Music). Gwen Gale (talk) 11:36, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was initially told that I had seven days to modify the entry. It seems unfair/bad form to suddenly move the goalposts after the initial deadline. My Wikipedia expertise is limited, so I was slow in adding to the page, but my plans were to do so in order to prove the subject's notoriety, but I don't feel I have been given the chance. Please could I repost the entry in a few days time with the necessarily modifications included for the admins to reassess?

Certainly. You should consider making a userfied article at User:Snoopy1239/Dana immanuel and when its ready, move it to Dana immanuel. While in userspace, you can work on your article without fear of deletion=D.Smallman12q (talk) 01:35, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]