User talk:Ladysybilla
Possibly unfree File:Magic_mirror_by_Anne_Stokes.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Magic_mirror_by_Anne_Stokes.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.63.31 (talk) 22:31, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello Ladysybilla, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you haven't done so already, you may want to create an account.
Please read The Five Pillars of Wikipedia to help you get to know this place, and you might want to look at What Wikipedia is not to see what is and isn't suitable for Wikipedia.
And remember, don't submit copyrighted work without permission. By submitting your work you promise you wrote it yourself, or copied it from public domain resources — this does not include most web pages.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! Dan100 (Talk) 18:26, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
Image Tagging Image:Candycandy.jpg
|
Thanks for uploading Image:Candycandy.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam (T/C) 18:01, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. If you feel the link should be added to the article please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thanks. —tregoweth (talk) 05:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Lady Sybilla
A tag has been placed on Lady Sybilla 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 a person or group of people, 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 biographies.
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. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 06:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Russet Noon
A tag has been placed on Russet Noon, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
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. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 06:51, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Russet Noon
A tag has been placed on Russet Noon, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
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. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 07:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Russet Noon
A tag has been placed on Russet Noon, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
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. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 07:17, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Russet Noon
I have nominated Russet Noon, 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/Russet Noon. 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. --GedUK 09:18, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
In addition, accounts are for individuals only, not for companies or groups or other collective editing, and your username should reflect this.
Wikipedia is not a promotion website; this kind of activity is considered spam on Wikipedia, and forbidden by policies, and usernames that appear to be promotional also violate our username policy. Editing on Wikipedia is not intended to be used to promote anyone, or anything, and its use for that purpose will result in blocking of the account involved.
If you feel that there has been a mistake, please appeal this block by adding the text{{unblock|Your reason here}} on your user talk page or contacting the administrator who has blocked you. Your reason should include a clear response to this issue and a new username you wish to adopt that does not violate our username policy. Please check that your new username has not already been taken here. Nja247 12:09, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Ladysybilla (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I would like a chance to provide neutral documentation about the Russet Noon controversy. I will be more than happy to edit any part of the article that might come off as promotional, but I also know that I am entitled to provide factual information about the novel. Please allow me a chance to become better acquainted with Wikipedia standards. I assure you I have absolutely no intention of using Wikipedia as a promotional tool. I just want a chance to provide documented evidence about the Russet Noon case. |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1=I would like a chance to provide neutral documentation about the Russet Noon controversy. I will be more than happy to edit any part of the article that might come off as promotional, but I also know that I am entitled to provide factual information about the novel. Please allow me a chance to become better acquainted with Wikipedia standards. I assure you I have absolutely no intention of using Wikipedia as a promotional tool. I just want a chance to provide documented evidence about the Russet Noon case. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1=I would like a chance to provide neutral documentation about the Russet Noon controversy. I will be more than happy to edit any part of the article that might come off as promotional, but I also know that I am entitled to provide factual information about the novel. Please allow me a chance to become better acquainted with Wikipedia standards. I assure you I have absolutely no intention of using Wikipedia as a promotional tool. I just want a chance to provide documented evidence about the Russet Noon case. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
First, can you confirm whether you are in fact the same Lady Sybilla as the author of Russet Noon (where the concerns are a conflict of interest) or are you not (where it's lesser concern about your name). I'm talking with the admin who blocked you but generally the relevant standard for sources is at WP:RS (in particular, blog are NOT reliable enough). The other relevant standard is for not yet published books. If you can show that there is significant independent reliable sources concerning the book, your article may survive. Things like "News, blogs, articles and comments about the release of this already controversial book can be found just by conducting a Google search on the book's title or the author's name" aren't helpful so look for and describe the specific news you can find. However, it would be better, even if it does, for you not to edit the article directly and instead to use the talk page. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Dear Ricky81682:
I will be more than happy to compile quotations from various mainstream sites related to Twilight which have been documenting this controversy from the start. I will need a few days to do so, however, because it's a time consuming task, so all I ask is that you hang the article until I can put together a more neutral version of this controversy.
And yes, I am the same Lady Sybilla as the author. I can prove this by acknowledging so on the Russet Noon official website, but I'd like to know if that will be enough proof. Something else I can do is privately give you the ISBN number that I had originally purchased for Russet Noon. I can also provide proof my myidentifiers.com that this registration was withdrawn due to copyright issues brought up by the fandom community. I understand that it's best for me not to edit the article any further. However, how you can you get neutral facts about this book if you only allow access to editors that are basing everything on the gossip and hearsay that is going around online?
Once again, I'd like to reiterate that the book is being offered for free to public libraries and any interested parties who would like to own it as a collectors item. Due to the accusations of copyright infringement, Russet Noon will not be sold for money ever again. However, the impact it has had on the artistic community, not only the Twilight fandom, merits its inclusion in Wikipedia. Ladysybilla (talk) 03:24, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- You appear to be unwilling to stop editing the article about your book- but you were blocked because that was the only way to get you to stop. You now want to be unblocked in order to show that your book really is notable. I'm willing to acknowledge that possibility; it would help if you could substantiate that notability by pointing me toward two or three newspaper or magazine articles about your book. Not press releases or forum discussions, but articles in real newspapers, or science fiction or publishing magazines. The publication of a work of fan fiction without the original author's permission would definitely attract the attention of the media; as the author, you're in a position to know what newspapers and magazines have been interviewing you, and in what publications we can find articles about it. You can put the links here, and it will do much to strengthen your case for unblocking. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- Dear FisherQueen:
I apologize if I appear to be "unwilling to stop editing the article." I'm just trying to provide balanced information about it, since I feel that the editors trying to delete it haven't done the necessary research to verify the extent to which this controversy has impacted the online artistic community. But if you guys decide I shouldn't edit it, it's fine. All I ask is that whoever edits or moderates it actually does so without bastardizing it (please notice Frogwidget's vandalism-style modifications to it, especially the link she added to the external links list). That's all I ask to be allowed to do in reference to the Russet Noon article. As for my editing privileges, my Wikipedia editor account has been in good standing for many years now, so I don't deserve to be blocked. I am willing to abide by Wikipedia's regulations. As for the evidence you request, I would like to emphasize that I'm not claiming the book has attracted mainstream media attention yet. I haven't received any kind of legal communications on the part of Stephenie Meyer or her reps, which, in turn, leads me to believe that they don't have a problem with me publishing this novel as long as I do so for free. The reason I'm arguing that the Russet Noon article warrants inclusion in Wikipedia is because of the massive controversy it has spawned on the net. There are sites exclusively devoted to documenting updates on Russet Noon, and many fans have openly commented that they want to read the novel no matter what. The Russet Noon phenomenon is all over the net and, if given a reasonable amount of time to do so, I can provide evidence of it. Ladysybilla (talk) 03:25, 19 April 2009 (UTC)