User talk:TeranceH

Welcome!

Speedy deletion of Kelly Greenberg

A tag has been placed on Kelly Greenberg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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. Wperdue (talk) 15:56, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems again

I think maybe you are misunderstanding the issue with your entry. This is still almost an exact copy of [1]. You have simply changed the order around a bit. The sentences themselves are still copied verbatim from her bio. Please rewrite them in your own words so that this entry will not be deleted. Thank you. Wperdue (talk) 15:58, 11 April 2009 (UTC)wperdue[reply]

It is those sentences which I AM actively editing, updating and correcting. Bear in mind it is a bio and there are only so many ways to state the factual information. I am additionally adding citations to back up the content to other wiki documents. For the sake of Argument, I am working with Kelly Greenberg, the topic. She owns her own biography and information and as such is not subject to copyright restrictions on what others have written about her.

Please see the section on copyright owners who submit their own work to Wikipedia. You might also want to take a look at the conflict of interest policies since you have stated that you are working with the subject of the entry. Thank you. Wperdue (talk) 16:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)wperdue[reply]

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

[[Woodrow_wilson|President Woodrow Wilson</ref> wrote, government “keeps it promises, or does not

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6

The article Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Purely an point-of-view opinion essay, and not encyclopedic, per WP:NOTESSAY.

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. Nat Gertler (talk) 15:27, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 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/Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 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. Nat Gertler (talk) 16:31, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]