Jump to content

User talk:Writerzakwynn

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Writerzakwynn, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Ism schism (talk) 03:49, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Gulfam Khan Portrait.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Gulfam Khan Portrait.jpg, which you've sourced to Gulfam Khan. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
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 view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 14:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[edit]
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 view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! BO | Talk 02:03, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your decline advise on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gulfam Khan

[edit]

Hello, Greetings! I observed you have declined the AFC for Gulfam Khan, with reasons cited as "not adequately supported by reliable sources". Can you please help me understand - how can the following add up to "inadequate":

  • As many as 3 verifiable live references from Times of India, India's #1 National newspaper online
  • As many as 6 verifiable live references from IMDb - the most authoritative source for information on on International Cinema.
  • Several verifiable live references from very well-known and internationally famous TV channels e.g., Media 247 (UK), MSN Entertainment, Star TV, Zee TV, Sony TV, SAB TV, Colours TV.

Also you have advised "remove sources based on Wikipedia entries" - thank you for this valuable advise - this will be done immediately. But nevertheless, removing all the wikipedia references will not result in diminishing the value of the other authentic references - list of which is cited above. Just want to understand.

Moreover, let me help you with some examples - the following articles are either supported by similar references, or far too ill-referenced than Gulfam Khan's Article - that you have declined. Please help me understand, if Gulfam khan doesn't deserve a place, how can articles like the following deserve to have a place in the Wikipedia?

I can cite a few hundred more, but have to stop here due to paucity of time.

NOTE: I have nothing personal against the above-mentioned articles. I am just saying - if these can be, why not Gulfam Khan? Would appreciate an early response and action.

Zak Wynn (talk) 03:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I gave my opinion about your article to the best of my knowledge. The method used to evaluate articles is on a case by case basis considering each artice's merit and based on site wide norms!
If you believe the above articles and hundred more are substandard - you may nominate them for deletion.
If you disagree with my opinion - you can also move the article into Wikipedia's main space - but it will be nomiated for speedy deletion within a short time!
My attitude is that any subject is welcome in Wikipedia as long as the creator is willing and able to demonstrate the subject notability using reliable sources. Your article is full of references to Wikipedia pages and other sources that do not comply with the minimal requirements. If you remove all the irrelevant sources and provide some better sources - i.e. sources that actually support the fact in the article the next review may be more favorable. FYI IMD is not a WP:RS and the entry for this individual contains no useful information !
Besides bad sources there are other problems - but in a WP:BLP proper sourcing is of the uttermost priority.
Good luck with your article BO | Talk 13:48, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

[edit]

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) 14:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop spamming

[edit]

Please stop spamming fisheries articles on Wikipedia with a non-notable book written by a non-notable author. --Epipelagic (talk) 18:15, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, Writerzakwynn. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

[edit]

Hello, Writerzakwynn. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Writerzakwynn&oldid=1144474410"