User talk:Stumptowner

Cort and Fatboy

I have deleted the article per CSD G4. If you would like a formal review of the article's deletion, please go to deletion review where others can weigh in on the decision to delete. Recreating the article in the hopes of reviewing on the talk page is not the way to go. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:00, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've been through this process with this article before and it was saved by an admin but I guess I'll start all over again. Sigh.... Stumptowner (talk) 19:42, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recreating just the talkpage is not productive. A new DRV as mentioned above might be better, but it's perhaps too soon to file again. Jarkeld (talk) 20:39, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. I wasn't sure if I should add a note on the talkback page or not. Anyway, I have created a new DRV. No one has added any info or comments over there yet though. Stumptowner (talk) 20:48, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, it appears that the previous deletion review resulted in consensus that consensus was never met at AfD, and therefore the article could be restored. However, it allowed for a second AfD in which the article was deleted with consensus this time. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:05, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Theconversationprism.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Theconversationprism.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 01:17, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also the following images:

—Bkell (talk) 02:06, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Prismtiny.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Prismtiny.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. —Bkell (talk) 01:24, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Technologycardset.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Technologycardset.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 01:40, 22 April 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 01:40, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also File:Technologycardset2.jpg and File:Prismboston.jpg. —Bkell (talk) 02:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Twitterverseonfffound.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Twitterverseonfffound.jpg. 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-enwikimedia.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-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} 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. —Bkell (talk) 01:57, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfD: Cort Webber and Bobby "Fatboy" Roberts

This is a courtesy notice given your prior involvement with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cort and Fatboy or its deletion review (Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 April 10) that these related articles are currently listed at AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cort Webber. As attribution issues are involved, closure of this current AfD may result in the restoration of the earlier article, as a list of contributors would be necessary if the articles are retained. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:55, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

I have blocked this account indefinitely after CheckUser confirmation that you were abusing multiple accounts by using more than one account to !vote in a discussion. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Eagles 24/7 (C) 21:26, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Conversation Prism

The article The Conversation Prism has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A single infographic does not meet notability criteria. It looks rather like the article has been created to promote the infographic as a product.

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. Shritwod (talk) 08:44, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Conversation Prism for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Conversation Prism is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Conversation Prism 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Shritwod (talk) 08:46, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]