User talk:Cumbrowski
| This is a Wikipedia user page. This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cumbrowski. |
Welcome to Carsten's aka Roy<SAC> Forum
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
--Zeitgespenst (talk) 16:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for the info and invite. I joined the project and ported some of the content from the German Wikipedia over to the article about East German mark. :) --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 06:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks for letting me know that Google does not index Talk: pages
Hello, I was investigating a problem with the {{Google custom}} template: it doesn't find any results in the Talk: namespace, even though it does appear to work for the Wikipedia talk: namespace. This confused me until I Googled for clues and found your All Wikipedia Links Are Now NOFOLLOW posting which includes your comment that says "Google excluded the talk pages from the index". Thanks for helping me find the answer to this problem. Do you know of any other search engine that indexes Wikipedia's Talk: namespace? That would be useful for allowing searches on some of the lengthy talk page archives (when a talk page becomes very long, and Wikipedia users program a bot to archive it off to subpages). --Teratornis (talk) 09:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- Oops, I overlooked your message. I was also very busy lately and did only little amount of time at Wikipedia. I reduced it primarily to check some of the most important things in a "semi automated" way. Regarding your question about alternative ways to search user talk pages. I am not aware of any, but the advanced search options provided by the wiki itself (standard Media-Wiki option) does help a little bit. You know what I am referring to, right? The screen where you can specify which name spaces to search and which not? I hope that somebody will do something one day with the Wikipedia database dumps in that direction. It would not be something that allows searches for new comments that were recently added, but would be good to find past discussions.--roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 05:02, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Code of Conduct (affiliate marketing) GAN review question
Regarding your question: In terms of not having references...I honestly can't help you. I have encountered the same problems myself when editing articles about obscure articles. There is a desire to add information, but also the knowledge that you need to add reliable citations as well. And it's very, very frustrating when there are no references for something you know' is true.
I'm afraid to say that the simple truth is that some articles simply can't become Good Articles, because they have no references for them. It's rather disappointing, but you just have to deal with it.
Hope that helps.
Noble Story (talk) 03:59, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- Thank you for your comment and kind words. You obviously know what I am talking about, because you know the same pain.
-
- Regarding references, I am currently experimenting and testing a custom search engine for reliable sources. You can find it here [2]. You can play around with it and see, if it is useful for your research. It helped me already a lot, but I am not 100% happy with it yet. If you have any suggestions let me know.
-
- With Internet marketing is the problem that it is just emerging. I also contributed to articles that are about subjects that are fading away. My editing at Wikipedia made this more obvious than it would have otherwise and lead me to start working on or support preservation efforts. There are not only bad examples though. I am glad that the article to nofollow earned the GA status. The article to affiliate marketing is also a good candidate, which only lacks some fine tuning to be ready. Well, there is plenty of stuff left to do. :) --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 04:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] nofollow
Hi after a glass of wine (or two!) I have added some comments to the nofollow talk page, see what you think (make allowances for the wine!). All the best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.173.86.208 (talk) 21:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed deletion of Code of Conduct (affiliate marketing)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Code of Conduct (affiliate marketing), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- Absolutely no independent, third-party, objective reporting cited or found to support the majority of information added by a WP:COI editor.
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Flowanda | Talk 04:00, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
-
- Hi Flowanda, I removed the deletion template that you added. Did you not notice that the article has the status of "Good Article" WP:GA? It was reviewed by at least one other and highly reputable editor. During the evaluation process as part of the article nomination, changes and improvements were made to it, to follow best practices and standards of Wikipedia. Check out the articles talk page to see the discussion about that. And regarding your claim of WP:COI.... In what sense? How does that apply to this particular article? What could I possible gain from anything that is said in the article and why do you think that I cannot be subjective about it? I was not involved in the process of the establishment of the Code of Conduct or its addemdums. Cheers! --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 09:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- I am very sorry, Roy, but the article is not, and never was, a good article, unless I am missing something important on the talk page. I understand your frustration with affiliate marketing being considered a legitimate business, but Wikipedia is not going to help establish credibility, only reflect it in the legitimate sources it cites. I also understand your willingness and ability to defend the articles you care about, but please, if others agree with the AfD, I ask that you use your formidable talents to then help look for the sources that will keep the article. Flowanda | Talk 00:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, that was my mistake. I mixed up that article with the one to nofollow. You are right, it was not a GA, I nominated it, but it wasn't good enough yet. Well, now it will never be. I merged it into the article to affiliate marketing as per AfD. Cheers! --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 08:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- And I reverted your edits that basically copied the entire text of the deleted article into Affiliate marketing. Your blatant disregard of Wikipedia policy and breezy disrespect for other editors is unconscionable and wearing thin. By now, you should have a crystal clear working understanding of WP:RS, WP:SPAM and WP:COI, so please edit accordingly. Flowanda | Talk 12:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- ??? What do you mean? That you and the other editors believe that the subject does not warrant its own article is one thing. The article was created to keep the affiliate marketing article on subject without drifting off too much. Well, that was not meant to be, so I merged the content back into the article again. The redirect in the article page to the aff.mkt. article does not cover the subject. What good is a redirect to a page that does not contain the information that were requested in the first place? Since you are pushing the WP:COI thing. I believe I know what is getting you going here. The link to Cumbrowski.com. An older version of the article did not have that link. That was added because of the suggestions of the editor who did the GA review. See this old version of the conversation of the article's talk page. Quote: "Please summarize the Code, rather than putting the whole thing in the article. Provide a link to the full text, perhaps in the external links section.".... if you check a bit more in detail, then you will also find out why this made sense. The other comments during the AfD were not very helpful and IMO biased. Since when are the details about the establishment of a code of conduct for self regulation of an industry that used to be known for lawlessness and having no ethics an advertisement or promotional (except for the fact that it is something positive)? Maybe taking the time to check the facts in more detail would help a little bit to avoid those missinterpretations. I saw the reports here. Good material to start a witch-hunt. Geez! --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 22:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- And I reverted your edits that basically copied the entire text of the deleted article into Affiliate marketing. Your blatant disregard of Wikipedia policy and breezy disrespect for other editors is unconscionable and wearing thin. By now, you should have a crystal clear working understanding of WP:RS, WP:SPAM and WP:COI, so please edit accordingly. Flowanda | Talk 12:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, that was my mistake. I mixed up that article with the one to nofollow. You are right, it was not a GA, I nominated it, but it wasn't good enough yet. Well, now it will never be. I merged it into the article to affiliate marketing as per AfD. Cheers! --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 08:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- I am very sorry, Roy, but the article is not, and never was, a good article, unless I am missing something important on the talk page. I understand your frustration with affiliate marketing being considered a legitimate business, but Wikipedia is not going to help establish credibility, only reflect it in the legitimate sources it cites. I also understand your willingness and ability to defend the articles you care about, but please, if others agree with the AfD, I ask that you use your formidable talents to then help look for the sources that will keep the article. Flowanda | Talk 00:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Flowanda, I removed the deletion template that you added. Did you not notice that the article has the status of "Good Article" WP:GA? It was reviewed by at least one other and highly reputable editor. During the evaluation process as part of the article nomination, changes and improvements were made to it, to follow best practices and standards of Wikipedia. Check out the articles talk page to see the discussion about that. And regarding your claim of WP:COI.... In what sense? How does that apply to this particular article? What could I possible gain from anything that is said in the article and why do you think that I cannot be subjective about it? I was not involved in the process of the establishment of the Code of Conduct or its addemdums. Cheers! --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 09:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
[edit] AfD nomination of Code of Conduct (affiliate marketing)
[edit] You maybe interested in the Article Rescue Squadron
 |
Hello, Cumbrowski. Based on the templates on your talk page, please consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles from deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia. You can join >> here <<. |
[edit] Welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron!
| WELCOME | from a Article Rescue Squad member | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 Welcome to Article Rescue Squadron Cumbrowski, a dynamic list of articles needing to be rescued, which changes with new updates, can be found here:
I look forward to working with you in the future. Ikip (talk) 21:52, 27 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
[edit] Promotional editing
Hello, I became aware of your website through your borderline disruptive blog post here in which you implied that it was ok to insert spam links onto Wikipedia by asking experienced editors to slip them in. The policies and guidelines that you are advocating breaking are (as you know) WP:EL, WP:SPAM, and WP:COI. I consider this to be very serious as Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising, nor is it a linkfarm or a place to post your resume. I also found over 40 occurances of your site link on Wikipedia, most of which were planted by you to seemingly affect your site's traffic. This is your warning, stop using Wikipedia for promotional purposes by dropping your link wherever you see fit. It's hard to assume good faith when you've admitted to being interested in personal promotion of websites. Many policies apply here. Themfromspace (talk) 15:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
-
- I did not intend to imply what you are saying. It is also the first time that I heard from somebody that he interpreted this way. Of course it is not okay to insert spam links into Wikipedia and I also consider it unethical, if an experienced editor would agree to "slip in" questionable content and links into Wikipedia. An experienced editor can help however to determine notability of a subject, ensure that claims are backed up be reliable sources and with the wording of content in general. I don't see how this could be considered a bad idea, especially because there is still plenty of noticeable information missing in Wikipedia. Only because somebody asks for help with content does not automatically mean that the editor should just add it to Wikipedia without disregard of any guidelines and rules that were put in place to help people to contribute in a positive and wanted way to Wikipedia and the cause it represents.
- I posted the information about me here on Wikipedia to be transparent to other editors, if they take the time to do their due diligence. I made public which subjects I am interested in, personally and professionally. I made clear about the specific subjects where COI could be applied to some extend and in those case I also always seek out the opinions and reviews by other editors... not only "friendly editors", but editors with whom I have my differences as well. Most of the link you are referring to are located in the user-space and thus not exposed to regular Wikipedia users, unless they specifically include the user space in their research. I never "slipped in" or "sneaked in" any content or links.
- I am getting (at least did so in the past), satisfaction from contributing something to my environment and society where I am living in. I maintain a website without any commercial value at all, for the same reasons. Shutting it down would save me money and time, just like it would the many supporters of Wikipedia, if Wikipedia is being shut down, but the money "lost" and time spent are not the factors by which we decide to shutdown those kind of projects. I don't know about your motivation, but now you know my motivations. I consider the stuff that you implied in your message to me, about me and my motives, to be an insult that is not warranted at all. If you think otherwise, please provide details about what you consider "evidence" for you’re made up claims to analyze them in greater detail. I might be wrong about you, but I have the feeling that you are not the kind of person who likes details and specifics very much. Well, written words can be understood differently than if we would hear the same words spoken to us. This might be the case here. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 15:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- Nobody has called you out on this before? You've also been brought up at COIN. You've even been a part of a RFAR. Clearly I'm not the first to see this pattern of borderline advertising and gaming the system. I'm not gonna do anything about it if I have your word that you'll stop posting your personal links on here. ThemFromSpace 18:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- No, I was not called out on it before, at least not the way I got called out now, because I was always open about what it did and why I did it. I also was always trying to have other editors review the stuff that I did in Wikipedia. I noted the COIN incident on my user page myself. See the section Other Wikipedia Stuff. That incident had actually a different cause than the issue that you seem to have. If you are interessted in the full detail of that story, check out this page. Btw. you will find on my user page also a link to my request for review, which I aked for in addition to what I was already doing in the past on article and user talk pages. Regarding links from Wikipedia. If I have so much commercial interest in links from Wikipedia, why would I have spent hours and hours trying to convince people that the "nofollow" attribute should be used for all external links in Wikipedia. I consolidated several debates about this subject and put it on my personal blog here (I did it again, a link to a site of mine, which I hope at least one user will click on... you! :))
- I will not and cannot give you my word that I won't post any links to sites under my control. If it makes sense, then I will add it and/or suggest adding it. I did that in the past, where I posted my suggestions on article talk pages where I announced what edits I am going to do, asking for feedback, comments and objections. I am aware that some folks don't check the talk pages and only act, if they see activities on the article pages as well. In those cases I always refer to my statements at the talk page, where I posted the reasoning behind it. In some cases things where removed with my approval, in other cases were changes made and in other cases my changes were accepted. It does not make sense to me to sacrifice quality and usefulness over a principle whos definition is very subjective at best. COI is a term that is very vague and mushy. COI can be a good and a bad thing IMO.
- COI motivates people to contribute, COI also means usually inside and indepth knowledge. Details and sources might be unearthed that would not have been discovered otherwise. However, COI has a catch-twenty-two. COI makes it hard and in some cases impossible to be objective. For that reason is it benefitial for somebody where COI does or may be applies to work together with other editors without the same bias. An example for this is my work on the article to nofollow where I admit to be somewhat biased. However, I knew a lot about the subject and there was not much in Wikipedia about it. I worked together with another editor, who I would hardly consider to be a "friend" of mine (on the contrary) and got it together with him to the status of GA. I hope this makes sense. As I also mentioned already, COI is a strong motivator for people to contribute. It was actually in my case the trigger why I pressed "edit" for the first time to fix an error in an article about a subject where COI definitely applies. I also wrote about that publically. I dare to claim that many, if not most editors of Wikipedia started out with a COI edit. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 02:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
- Nobody has called you out on this before? You've also been brought up at COIN. You've even been a part of a RFAR. Clearly I'm not the first to see this pattern of borderline advertising and gaming the system. I'm not gonna do anything about it if I have your word that you'll stop posting your personal links on here. ThemFromSpace 18:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Welcome to ARS!
Hi, Cumbrowski, welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying and rescuing articles and content that have been nominated for deletion. Every day hundreds of articles are deleted, many rightfully so. But many concern notable subjects and are poorly written, ergo fixable, and should not be deleted. We try to help these articles and content to quickly improve and address the concerns of why they are proposed for deletion. This covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated!
If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you. And once again — Welcome! ~~~~ |
||||
[edit] Looking for feedback
Hey, Cumbrowski! My name is Ks64q2, and I noticed you're in the Article Rescue Squadron as well- with a vastly more extensive editing pedigree than I! Anyway, I've got an article I wrote in the scope of the WP:BLOG project, and it got sent to AfD- it's a pretty heated debate. The article was deleted initially, and was recreated with improvements and notations to where the original AfD consensus was failed, but we have some very motivated deletionists working to kill it- I think to kill it would be easier than them being wrong the first go round! Nonetheless, the feedback I was seeking was on the arguments I'm making in that forum to save the article, to see if they're well founded and make sense, because some people are either ignoring them or just don't care- but it could be I'm not making the right points. The forum is at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Motley_Moose. If you get time, take a look and let me know. Danke! Ks64q2 (talk) 18:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free media (File:Fiore frank c.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Fiore frank c.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Frank Fiore
Hi, in response to your message, I've placed the article in your userspace, at User:Cumbrowski/Frank Fiore, so that you can address the notability concerns. Please ensure that you include sources to verify the information in the article before moving it into the mainspace again - unsourced biographies are often the victims of libellous vandalism, as unmaintained targets. Best, – Toon(talk) 18:56, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. I will take a look at the article. It was one of my first ones, so I wouldn't be surprised, if it fells short in quality in one or more aspects. Nobody ever had a problem with the article until now, so I never went back to see, if I can improve on it or not. Cheers! --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 19:05, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
- I just went through the article. It's horrible. I was thinking "I wrote that?" and are not so sure about it to be honest. I would have checked the article history to find out, but maybe it is better this way that I cannot do that. Now I can say to myself that it was changed by somebody else and that my original article was much better (even if that might not be true :)). I do remember though that I had a hard time to find any personal information about him, such as his birth date and location. He seems to be the private kind of guy.. writing useful and good stuff, but does not brag about it. I read a book he wrote and wanted to find out more about him here at WP to find out that there is no entry.. so I decided to create one. Memories come back to me hehe. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 19:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
[edit] The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter (September 2009)
| The Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Content |
|||||||
[edit] AFD
An article of yours is in AFD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TundraDraw. Joe Chill (talk) 21:00, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
[edit] NowCommons: File:DDR Mark Rueckseite 5Pfennig kl.jpg
File:DDR Mark Rueckseite 5Pfennig kl.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:DDR Mark Rueckseite 5Pfennig kl.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:DDR Mark Rueckseite 5Pfennig kl.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:44, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
- File:DDR Mark Vorderseite 5Mark 20JahreDDR.jpg is now available as Commons:File:DDR Mark Vorderseite 5Mark 20JahreDDR.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
[edit] AFD
An article of yours is in AFD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tetradraw. Joe Chill (talk) 23:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image (File:File:Tetradrawlogo.png)
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Joe Chill (talk) 14:40, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image (File:File:Tundradrawlogo.png)
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Joe Chill (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Chronology of Star Wars
An AFD discussion that you have previously participated in has been reignited. See here for the new discussion.--chaser (talk) 17:52, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Articles for deletion nomination of Chemical Reaction (artscene group)
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 00:02, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image File:CRo Logo WWW.jpg
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 03:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image File:CRO-logo-by-fli7e.jpg
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 03:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image File:CRO-logo-by-msx.jpg
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 03:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter
|
||||
Content
|
[edit] GA reassessment of Nofollow
An article that you have been involved in editing, Nofollow has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments here . If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. BelovedFreak 12:33, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
[edit] legand's artworks
[[File: legands artworks means the new edition of artwork series.we are presented by any types of art works. eg; sculptures ,R eleifes , grotos , landscapings , garden decorative arts , handmade waterfalls , hardscapings ,design paintings e.t.c... more; contact;......-legand's artworks- chalakkudy town-kerala-india/ more details= contact,,, legandsulptures@gmail.com , mobile/9846607141. thak you.] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.83.53.90 (talk) 08:18, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Rescue
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armageddon theology WritersCramp (talk) 12:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image File:Webmasterworld.png
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 05:09, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image File:Webmasterworld.png
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:52, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed deletion of MediaTrust
The article MediaTrust has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Unambiguous advertisement (brings together direct response advertisers and affiliate publishers with the purpose of generating campaigns that deliver leads and sales) for a non-notable online business. Another page designed to look plausible by a PR pro, the "references" are to Facebook and Twitter accounts, PR sources, Top 500 lists, and the like. GNews finds a busy PR department, but nothing better.
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 {{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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 19:31, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Proposed deletion of Advaliant
The article Advaliant has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Non-notable online publicity business. "References" are to press releases or minor trade awards. Google News finds only routine announcements and press releases.
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 {{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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 19:40, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image File:Advaliant.jpg
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 07:07, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image File:Performics.png
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:12, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image File:Xing openbc logo.png
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:50, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Nomination of EComXpo for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EComXpo(3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Cerejota If you reply, please place a {{talkback}} in my talk page if I do not reply soon. 10:40, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Non-free rationale for File:Pcboard300xXXX.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Pcboard300xXXX.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:53, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image File:Xing openbc logo.png
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:49, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Orphaned non-free image File:Webmasterworld.png
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:49, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter
|
|||
