User talk:Tommytomato

Greetings...

Hello, Tommytomato, and welcome to Wikipedia!

To get started, click on the link that says "welcome".

I (and the rest of us here, too) hope you like it here and decide to stay!

Happy editing! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Koopa (band)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. However, please know that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, know that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Koopa (band), you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:39, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Koopa and your demands

It's become apparent that you have no idea how things work on Wikipedia. Firstly anyone can edit the Koopa article they do not need your permission to do so.

Additionally you cannot demand that the article is deleted. You can make a request via WP:AFD but I tell you now it won't be deleted that way either.

Now it's obvious that you are part of the band in some way and as such you have a major conflict of interest. Ideally you should stay away from the article and allow others to write it for you. If you wish certain facts to be included then notify the editors on the talk page along with verifiable references. This leads me to the information you are adding to the article. Wikipedia is not about truth, it's about verifiability. If the facts you are adding to the cannot be verified by independent 3rd party sources they they will be removed from the article. You, as part of the band, are considered to be a primary source and as such are not considered to be a reliable source for most things. As you have a conflict of interest it is deemed that your priority is to the band, not to Wikipedia and as such anything you add to the article has to be backed up by 3rd party references from reliable sources per WP:RS.

You will do yourself a favour if you quit with the belligerent tone, all it will do is get editor's backs up and make things harder for you to get a neutral and accurate article. Incidentally, as it's a British band the article should be written using UK English spelling. --Web Hamster 16:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your comment on my talk page

My concern is not about the factual accuracy; as long as there are sources to back up said facts, then they can be added. However, Wikipedia reinforces facts found from primary sources (such as the band's own website) with third-party reliable sources that are independent of the article's subject. And edits made by individuals found or claiming to represent the subject constitute a clear conflict of interest, insomuch as this is an encyclopedia, not a source for any sort of promotion or publicizing — whether or not a promotional tone is used.

You claimed that this edit corrected "totally inaccurate" information on the page, but your changes were rather minor, and seemed more of a subtle spin on promotional copy. In some of that edit, you merely changed the order of words or their capitalization. Why? You should really read up on Wikipedia's manual of style.

In this edit, you make claims that the band rejected an offer from EMI. Without corroborating references, either from EMI or third-party, the statement could only be made that 'the band says they rejected an offer from EMI' (emphasis mine). However, without the official band's website being available, we cannot verify this statement at all. So it should be deleted until the aforementioned references can be found and verified. The last major part of the changes you made indicated changes in ownership or licensing of material, et. al., but again, without references, we can't state unverifiable facts.

Most important, you really shouldn't be editing this article if you are a representative of the band, which we as yet cannot verify. As much as you would like the article to read a certain way, the tone must be completely dispassionate and neutral, and facts must be backed up with verifiable sources, not simply your word for it. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:24, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Judy67p.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Judy67p.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.

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 uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Killiondude (talk) 22:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Transcend Records

A tag has been placed on Transcend Records 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 an organization or company, 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 organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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. Hoponpop69 (talk) 02:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Alistair Murphy

The article Alistair Murphy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no evidence of notability

While all 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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 06:52, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Cohort music

The article Cohort music has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No assertion of notability, lacks coverage from third-party reliable sources.

While all 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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — ξ ^xplicit 05:15, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Judy Dyble appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Please see in particular the policy on peacock terms such as "legendary". Thank you. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Joepubleo.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Joepubleo.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Image Screening Bot (talk) 12:36, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Paul Baker (songwriter)

I have nominated Paul Baker (songwriter), 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/Paul Baker (songwriter). 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. SnottyWong ^confess 20:33, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Msc.woodstock.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Msc.woodstock.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:51, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Dansolo.jpg

The file File:Dansolo.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned image with no foreseeable encyclopedic use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pkbwcgs (talk) 21:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Olliecooper.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Olliecooper.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 {{permission 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. Here is a list of your uploads. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Also:

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]