User talk:Bellacolleman.5

Welcome!

Hello, Bellacolleman.5, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Eloise Olivia Katherine Taylor, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:58, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Eloise Olivia Katherine Taylor

The article Eloise Olivia Katherine Taylor has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:58, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Charlotte Armstrong-Jones

The article Charlotte Armstrong-Jones has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 02:57, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Charlotte Armstrong-Jones

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Charlotte Armstrong-Jones, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. —C.Fred (talk) 01:46, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Amelia Armstrong-Jones

The article Amelia Armstrong-Jones has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. AstroCog (talk) 02:13, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Amelia Armstrong-Jones. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 02:49, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte Armstrong-Jones and reliable sources

I've deleted Charlotte Armstrong-Jones because there aren't any reliable sources presented about her. Further, you claim that she was photographed on a balcony, yet the information for the photograph identifies the subject as somebody else.

Please do not create an article about Charlotte again unless you can clearly show that she exists and has been covered in WP:Secondary sources. Continuing to create articles without those sources raise the question of whether your intent is to disrupt Wikipedia or whether you are trying to contribute constructively.

If any of this is unclear, please ask for help. —C.Fred (talk) 22:19, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Amelia Armstrong-Jones

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Amelia Armstrong-Jones, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. The-Pope (talk) 00:56, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October 2011

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Amelia Armstrong-Jones. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. The-Pope (talk) 01:12, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, as you did at The Honorable Charlotte Armstrong-Jones, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. —C.Fred (talk) 01:26, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Margarita Armstrong-Jones, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 19:00, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you create an inappropriate page, as you did at Charlotte Armstrong-Jones, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. The sources you cited in this article all mention Margarita; none mention Charlotte. Accordingly, it appears that Charlotte does not exist, and articles on made up subjects—hoax articles—are not allowed on Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 01:18, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Princess Charlotte of Wessex.jpeg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Princess Charlotte of Wessex.jpeg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 03:00, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Princess Charlotte of Wessex.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Princess Charlotte of Wessex.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 03:17, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with File:Princess Charlotte Wessex.jpg

Hello. Concerning your contribution, File:Princess Charlotte Wessex.jpg, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from dreamstime.com. As a copyright violation, File:Princess Charlotte Wessex.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. File:Princess Charlotte Wessex.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

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 Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at File talk:Princess Charlotte Wessex.jpg and send an email with the message to permissions-enwikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at File talk:Princess Charlotte Wessex.jpg with a link to where we can find that note.
If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on File talk:Princess Charlotte Wessex.jpg.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 03:27, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Upon inspection, Princess Charlotte of Wessex is yet another incarnation of the article about an unsourced (fictitious?) royal. Since you've refused to explain yourself, ask for assistance, or otherwise demonstrate that your intent is to edit constructively, I've revoked your editing privileges temporarily:

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

—C.Fred (talk) 03:33, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Colegio Menor San Francisco de Quito

The article Colegio Menor San Francisco de Quito has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:UNSOURCED and for good reason, the only sources that mention this school are tangential.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Allan Nonymous (talk) 21:22, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]