User talk:Thebenm

Welcome

Hello Thebenm! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! EliminatorJR ^Talk 20:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Attribution • Neutral point of view • Notability Conflict of interest • Autobiography Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Citing sources • Footnotes Image use policy • Copyrights • Fair use External links • Spam • Vandalism Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry What Wikipedia is not • Deletion policy

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The "perfect" article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Proposed deletion of Lucia Daniella Griggi

The article Lucia Daniella Griggi has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Josh3580_talk/hist 20:34, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lucia Daniella Griggi

The article Lucia Daniella Griggi has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Josh3580_talk/hist 20:35, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Lucia dogtown laughing.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lucia dogtown laughing.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:59, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Lucia with buddy.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lucia with buddy.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:00, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Lucia swim black white.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lucia swim black white.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:00, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Lucia swim color.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lucia swim color.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:00, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Lucia skip underwater.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lucia skip underwater.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:00, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Lucia shooting dogtown.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lucia shooting dogtown.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:01, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Wave Loch Tom at Raging Waters.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Wave Loch Tom at Raging Waters.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:04, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Tom at Schlitterbahn 1991.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tom at Schlitterbahn 1991.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:04, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tom Flows Bo.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tom Flows Bo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. 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. Stefan2 (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Escape from LA poster.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Escape from LA poster.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. 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. Stefan2 (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Drex South Africa 2001.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Drex South Africa 2001.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:06, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wave Loch‎

Thanks for your interest in the Wave Loch article, ‎Thebenm. Unfortunately I have some concerns about your contributions. You appear to be copy-pasting the text from http://www.waveloch.com/history into the article. Wikipedia is unable to host copyrighted material and respects the copyright holder's rights. See WP:COPYOTHERS and WP:COPYPASTE] for more information.

Also, including external links in the article text is generally a bad idea. See WP:EL for the relevant guideline. Appropriate external links are generally included in a separate section at the end of the article.

The Wave Loch article is rather small when cut down to the text that can be properly licensed. I hope you will be able to expand it in a way that conforms with Wikipedia policy after reading the policy pages I have linked to. ParacusForward (talk) 02:42, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Lochtefeld Raging Waters.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lochtefeld Raging Waters.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 04:05, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Lochtefeld schlitterbahn prone.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lochtefeld schlitterbahn prone.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:26, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Swatch Florence Flowbarrel.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Swatch Florence Flowbarrel.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:27, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Lochtefeld Raging Waters.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lochtefeld Raging Waters.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:32, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lucia Daniella Griggi (January 19)

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit when you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lucia Daniella Griggi.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! —Anne Delong (talk) 23:25, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Thebenm, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there!

Wave Loch

While we welcome most contributions to the encyclopedia, people who work for an organisation are discouraged from editing the article about that organisation. Notable people are asked not to edit their own articles or articles where they may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible. There's more information on this topic at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.

Wikipedia is not intended to serve as a webhost, and is not the place to advertise, or to go into extreme detail about an organization or its mission. That is not the kind of information you would see in a book-based encyclopedia, and it's not the kind of encyclopedia we are trying to build. There's more information on this topic at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. -- Diannaa (talk) 02:14, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa I don't work for Wave Loch and did this as a favor to Tom Lochtefeld, who I know from my days working at Surfer Magazine. I don't see how the present Wave Loch page is better than what was there.

I looked at the Wiki page for IBM as a template for Wave Loch. Who put all that up there?

Thebenm (talk) 03:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC) Ben[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Escape from LA poster.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Escape from LA poster.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:25, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree files

Some of the files that you have uploaded may be unfree. See Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2014 March 8#OTRS pending since January for details. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:49, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lucia Daniella Griggi

Hello Thebenm. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Lucia Daniella Griggi".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Lucia Daniella Griggi}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 02:56, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Various points relating to your unblock request

I hope the following will help to clarify the situation for you.

Much of your editing, from both accounts, has been promotional in tone, some of it very much so.
At least some of the content you have posted has been copied from elsewhere; for example, I found a large part of the content that you posted at User:Merge4wear also appears at timbrauchfoundation.org/board-of-directors.html. It is almost never acceptable to copy content from other web sites to Wikipedia, for two reasons. Firstly, that is usually a copyright infringement. Secondly, even on the rare occasions when a copyright owner is willing to license the contents of their web site for free reuse in accordance with Wikipedia's licensing terms, a business or other organisation's own web site is usually designed to give readers a favourable impression of the organisation, not to give a neutral account, as required by Wikipedia. In fact, that may be at least part of the reason why the content you posted seemed so promotional.
The user name "Merge4wear" suggests that the account represents a business, which is not permitted, as an account must be for an individual person. I don't know of any reason to object to the user name "Thebenm", however.
The fact that your editing has essentially consisted of writing about two organisations or businesses, and that in both cases your editing has looked promotional, encourages the impression that you are editing for those companies, perhaps being paid to do so. There is no rule against that, but if it is so then the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require you to state that you are doing so.
Technically, by editing from the account "Thebenm" while another of your accounts is blocked means that you are evading the block, and theoretically Thebenm could be blocked for that reason. It is clear the editing in question was done in good faith, with no attempt to commit any abuse, and all you have done is post messages relating to your unblock request, so I don't think there is any need to block the account. However, I ask you not to edit except on your talk page until the matter is settled, as otherwise you are likely to be blocked for block-evasion. As long as you have an account blocked, you should not edit (except your own talk page) until either that account is unblocked or an administrator tells you that it's OK to go back to editing with your other account.
I will contact the blocking administrator, Materialscientist, to discuss whether it's OK to let you edit again. In order to give yourself the best chance, I suggest that you do the following: (a) indicate that you have an understanding of why your editing was considered promotional, and that you won't make the same mistakes again, (b) indicate that you understand the copyright issue, and that in future you will write content in your own words, rather than copying other places, and (c) state clearly whether or not you have been editing on behalf of any person, business, or other organisation that you have written about, and if so whether this has been all or part of work you were paid for. If you can do those things, I will be willing to consider whether giving you the go ahead will be suitable. If I do, it will be the account Thebenm that you should use, not Merge4wear because of the user name policy issue. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:07, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, you posted at User talk:JamesBWatson/Open, but as far as I can see this account should be autoconfirmed, so you should be able to post at User talk:JamesBWatson. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:30, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

End of blocked status

I have contacted the blocking administrator, and we are both willing to unblock you if you show that you understand why the editing you did was considered to be promotional. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:56, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have just seen your recent message on my talk page. I think you have answered my concerns, so you may regard yourself as unblocked, and feel free to carry on editing from this account. The other account could be unblocked and renamed, but as I have already said, there doesn't seem much point, since you can just use this account. You seem also to have made a very common mistake, which is thinking that the user name of the account you use should reflect the subject of the article you write. There is no need for that at all.

I hope from now on you can edit without further problems. (Well, maybe that's a lot to ask, as we all encounter problems sometimes, but I mean major problems such as being blocked.) Please feel welcome to contact me on my talk page again if you have anything else to ask me. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:08, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Declaration of affiliation with Merge4_ (brand)

Wikipedia rules require the following below.

So here I am declaring that I Ben Marcus - aka thebenm - am paid by Merge4 socks to provide a variety of writing and public relations services for Merge4_ and that included starting this article about the company for Wikipedia.

These Terms of Use prohibit engaging in deceptive activities, including misrepresentation of affiliation, impersonation, and fraud. As part of these obligations, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. You must make that disclosure in at least one of the following ways:

a statement on your user page, a statement on the talk page accompanying any paid contributions, or a statement in the edit summary accompanying any paid contributions. Applicable law, or community and Foundation policies and guidelines, such as those addressing conflicts of interest, may further limit paid contributions or require more detailed disclosure.'

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bob Purvey (July 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Urban Versis 32 was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Thebenm/Bob Purvey and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Urban Versis 32^KB ⚡ ^{(talk / contribs)} 01:48, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aloha.

I figured out how to do references and citations and put in 7 of them and resubmitted it, also with a couple of new photos.

Let me know if this version is okay as there are other Wikipedians who want to add to it.

You say you are a fan of WWII aircraft.

What did you think of the end of Dunkirk, when a dead-stick, no engine Spitfire shoots down a Stuka?

That bugged me, in an otherwise good movie.

A friend here in California has a P51 Mustang - Miss Torque - and a P38 Lightning = Honey Bunny - and a P47 Thunderbolt - Dottie Mae - they pulled from the bottom of a lake in Italy and reconditioned.

Thanks. Thebenm (talk) 04:42, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bob Purvey (July 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Gusfriend were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bob Purvey and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gusfriend (talk) 10:26, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Bob Purvey has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bob Purvey. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 10:38, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Bob Purvey has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bob Purvey. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 10:46, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional content on Draft:Bob Purvey

Your draft Draft:Bob Purvey is laughably promotional…”with his big blue eyes, broad smile and comical behavior”, “adventurous odyssey about three champion surfers gallivanting around the world”, “Ugly's innovative board short has set a new standard in functionality and of course the brand sizzles.”, “So, what will Bob discover next and, more importantly, what will he create from it?”. Theroadislong (talk) 10:47, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to declare any conflict of interest per WP:DISCLOSE, if your relationship to "Ugly's innovative board short" is the same as that to Merge4, earlier on this talk page. You must declare this on the talk page of any article you edit, in the edit summary of the changes you make, or on your user page at User:Thebenm. --Lord Belbury (talk) 18:00, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, no commercial relationship to Ugly Surfboards.

Just getting this started for others to add onto.

I've written a couple dozen books and hundreds of magazine and online articles.

Wikipedia is tricky. Thebenm (talk) 18:17, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely a different writing skillset! So long as you're sticking to what cited sources say, writing original text and declare any conflict of interest, you should be fine. Wikipedia is written in a drier and more neutral style than the one you're going for, but other users can copyedit to the house style if the basic information is sound and sources are clear.

Keep in mind that the conflict of interest policy at WP:COI goes as much for personal as professional connections, though. If you know Bob Purvey personally, you may be writing some aspects of his biography from memory (where an apparently unsourced statement like "Bob trained with Paton Price" isn't taken from a source you read but forgot to footnote, but your own recollection), and other editors should be made aware of that. --Lord Belbury (talk) 07:54, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bob Purvey (August 2)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Theroadislong were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bob Purvey and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 07:25, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Bob Purvey

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Bob Purvey, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. PRAXIDICAE🌈 18:36, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

paid editing

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Thebenm, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Thebenm|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 19:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thebenm, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that they have been paid by BobPurvey for their contributions to Wikipedia.

I have not been paid by Bob Purvey to start the edit of his Wikipedia.

I'm a professional writer and thought I could get it started without too much friction.

I was hoping that once it got started, others would add to it.

Not paid.

Thank you. Thebenm (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]