User talk:Xantheif src

Please be aware that the use of multiple accounts to stack votes is a bannable offence. If you would like to edit Wikipedia, please stick to one account. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That said, allow me to welcome your useraccount to Wikipedia (you indicate on your request for adminship that you've edited before). I thought I'd let you know a few things. Firstly, to perform the things you described, one does not need to be an administrator. Adding content only requires an internet connection, and the same for removal. In fact, if you are especially interested in catching new acts of vandalism, you can go on a recent changes patrol. If you find bad editors, you can report them to the vandalism noticeboard, or one of the other administrator's noticeboards if such is more appropriate. If you would like to look for brand new pages to help out on, you can look at the most recent creations. If instead you'd like to help get rid of new "bad" articles, you can brush up on our deletion policy, and apply speedy deletion, proposed deletion, and deletion discussion tags where appropriate. Now you might ask, why bother being an admin? Admins are often referred to as editors with mops. Admins can actually delete pages, block users, and protect pages against editing. But even a normal edit can do these things, just by asking an admin! And finally, I must inform you that you won't pass the request for adminship at this point. Most Wikipedians do not trust users with fewer than several months of logged in activity, as well as several thousand edits, with the tools of adminship. But if you've read everything I just told you, you'll see that you don't really need these tools to help Wikipedia in the way you want. Cheers. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:19, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've just closed your RfA, as it didn't have any chance of passing. I suggest you follow the advice given to you by Someguy1221 above, and try again in a few months time. Best wishes. Acalamari 00:47, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to make sure you're aware, if you leave a comment on my talk page, I'll reply on my talk page. Cheers. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also want to chip in here. Someguy1221 gives excellent advice, and I'd just like to add a link to the list of policies. There's lots of reading that can be done to get a handle on the finer points of Wikipedia, but none of that actually has to be read. You can just go about cleaning up articles, deleting vandalism, etc. If you ever have any questions about anything at all, I am always available on my talk page. Another idea is to add {{subst:dated adoptme}} to your userpage if you would like an experienced editor to help coach and mentor you. Useight (talk) 01:13, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quantum levitation

Copyright problems

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Quantum levitation, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material without the permission of the author. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~ulf/levitation.html. As a copyright violation, Quantum levitation appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Quantum levitation has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Quantum levitation and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Quantum levitation with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Quantum levitation.

However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Martijn Hoekstra 16:26, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Image-LevGeckoFeet.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:LevGeckoFeet.jpg. The copy called Image:LevGeckoFeet.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 16:29, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status of images

You are uploading images of which the copyright notices aren't correct. For example, you assert in the above image that the person who took that photo has been dead for 100 years or more. I doubt that that is the case. Please don't do that. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, because of it's licence. see here for more information. Martijn Hoekstra 16:42, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and Copyrights

Based on your question on my talk page (which I've replied to) and the newer comments you've received here, I think you need a little knowledge on copyrights, so as to prevent your making contributions that will merely be removed from Wikipedia. Wikipedia has a very strong policy concerning copyrights, which you can read about here. In a nutshell, any content copied to Wikipedia from a copyrighted source will be removed with extreme prejudice, and most copyrighted images uploaded to Wikipedia will be similarly deleted. There are only two ways you can be sure offhand that an image or a piece of text is not copyrighted, and that is if either the author/photographer has been dead for over 100 years, or the author/photographer explicitly released the content into the public domain, which will usually be indicated in the same body of work that you find it, if this is the case. Certain works are naturally in the public domain, such as works of the US federal government (if you have question as to whether a particular work is in the publich domain, you can request help at the help desk). Copyrighted images can be used to some extent under the fair-use policy, but this policy has always seemed so daunting to me that I choose to not upload such images. Uh, so in a smaller nutshell, if you copy something to Wikipedia that you don't own, it will probably be deleted. Someguy1221 19:01, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Sam Harrell

A tag has been placed on Sam Harrell requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Blanchardb-Me^MyEars_MyMouth-timed 16:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Ennis Lions

A tag has been placed on Ennis Lions requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Blanchardb-Me^MyEars_MyMouth-timed 16:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

January 2008

Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Mexico, without explaining the reason for the removal in the edit summary. Unexplained removal of content does not appear constructive, and your edit has been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox for test edits. Thank you. Oxymoron⁸³ 16:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory Bernard Johnson

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Gregory Bernard Johnson, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 23:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]