User talk:Theradu123

Re: Leviathan Review

Ok let me explain a few things, firstly it would be better off to have started a topic about this on the article's talk page. Secondly, what you said here puts you on the lines of a conflict of interest which the very first of what you said shows: "Our website is obviously an online publication, we advertise for large clients like Nick Cave and The Big Day Out Music Festival, and our staff is a mixture of paid and volunteer workers."

Thirdly, I suggest that the site (or source really) be reviewed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard but reviewed obviously for use in articles as a usable review site. You may want to see these nominations for deletion of The Metal Observer site: nomination 1 and nomination 2 for what I mean. The Metal Observer article was deleted because it was a self-published source (which User:Cannibaloki indicated in his edit summary) and the site is pretty popular here for use as reviews but was deleted nonetheless. The next step would be to find out if 'your' site can be used in the professional review area.

Also, no need for such a reaction to a "word", have some tolerance please as people can choose their own "words" as they please but no matter. Also, just a suggestion but you may want to archive your talk page instead of deleting, though you have the right to blank your page if you do so please, so don't forget that and let people know. FireCrystal (talk) 02:33, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was just noting that Metal Observer was deleted as an article and reviews were removed from album reviews because of this. The site may not be "a Metal Observer" but it depends if there are Third-party sources on it from other notable review sites and the like. People will come and remove it if they believe it doesn't pass up for whatever reason. It's only a plus if it has an article (establishing it as truly notable and that's if it survives deletion).

It's not that you have financial interest but the fact that you are a part of 'The Drarf' is enough for a conflict of interest such as being a member of a band.

Having another opinion is good but as I state above it must be notable enough (or reliable enough in this case). I'm still suggesting a review of the site anyway. The site is probably ok to use but some people may think differently.

FireCrystal (talk) 21:32, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Crooked x.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Crooked x.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 12:21, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, as you forgot on your recent edit to Crooked X. Thank you. --Ericdn (talk) 12:35, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for File:Crookedx album2.jpg}

Thank you for uploading File:Crookedx album2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for File:Crookedx album2.jpg}

Thank you for uploading File:Crookedx album2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for File:Crookedx album2.jpg}

Thank you for uploading File:Crookedx album2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 10:29, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:DTV Logo - Black.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:DTV Logo - Black.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:54, 7 April 2009 (UTC) --Skier Dude (talk) 04:54, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:DTV Logo - White.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:DTV Logo - White.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:54, 7 April 2009 (UTC) --Skier Dude (talk) 04:54, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2010

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Ckatz^chat _spy 04:25, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:TGL8.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:TGL8.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 21:28, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Transatlantic band.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Transatlantic band.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Can't find a license on the source website

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. UAwiki (talk) 09:15, 9 May 2012 (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) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]