User talk:BRO7

Blocked[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without verifying permission. You have been previously warned that this is against policy, but have persisted.

Please take this opportunity to be sure you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: . However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Giant Snowman 17:33, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

BRO7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have permission because the work is mine. Look up the sources, the words in each post written are my own, I am the source

Decline reason:

You've added material from multiple sources - I find it hard to believe you authored all of them. Even if by some chance you did, they were still not appropriately licensed for Wikipedia. You persisted in this behaviour despite being warned multiple times. If you will not listen to the community when it tells you you are violating Wikipedia's policies, you will not be welcome here. Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:01, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

BRO7 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I assure you I authored all of them, they were from an old website I use to run. Iraqsport.com.

Decline reason:

That doesn't suffice to meet our requirements. If the website is still up, change the licensing there (i.e., the point of original publication) to one compatible with ours (see link to copyright policy above). — Daniel Case (talk) 15:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Proposed deletion of Haris Al-Maliki[edit]

The article Haris Al-Maliki has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, no indication the club played in a national competition required by WP:FOOTYN.

While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fenix down (talk) 15:58, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]