User talk:Daremedareyou

Speedy deletion of Aquamaster

A tag has been placed on Aquamaster, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

this article is not about anything, except what it is not about

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 17:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2009

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the article Epilator has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. Adding an edit summary claiming to remove advertising whilst adding advertising is not going to work! Mayalld (talk) 17:23, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Epilator. While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Thank you. Mayalld (talk) 17:40, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Emagine.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Emagine.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 05:03, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2009

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Epilator, you will be blocked from editing. Mayalld (talk) 07:28, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Rodeo Watch Company

A tag has been placed on Joe Rodeo Watch Company, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Kingpin13 (talk) 20:02, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Joe Rodeo

A tag has been placed on Joe Rodeo requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 20:24, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Joe Rodeo

A tag has been placed on Joe Rodeo, 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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 20:47, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 20:50, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Joe Rodeo

A tag has been placed on Joe Rodeo, 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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the article or have a copy emailed to you. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 20:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. Please use the {{hangon}} template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion. Thank you. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 20:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with Joe Rodeo. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Garyzx (talk) 21:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been indefinitely blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. To contest this block, please email me or place {{unblock}} on your page, including an explanation why you feel the block should be removed.

RexNL (talk) 21:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is your final warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Joe Rodeo. Catgut (talk) 21:16, 2 February 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

Victim of aggressive moderators, who speedy delete topics that dont interest them

Decline reason:

No, we speedy delete articles that meet certain criteria established by the community. In this case, the criteria was "blatant advertising". Please see WP:CSD for more info. — Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:01, 2 February 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

The Moderators viewpoint of what is advertising is obviously clouded by their own limited understanding of what advertising is, I request someone from the site operation to review my listing for Joe Rodeo

Decline reason:

It is you who do not understand our policies and guidelines. Please see Spam and advertising, Speedy deletion (CSD G11), Notability, and, before you request another unblock, the instructions. —Travis ^talk 22:20, 2 February 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

You should follow the guidelines of Wikipedia - "Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion.", So unblock me, and contribute to the mission, as opposed to speedy deleting everything you can't understand or worse, read.

Decline reason:

Request declined. The article was spam, your attitude is awful, your comments to other users offensive, and unless you can put forward a sensible, non-insult-based reason to justify your unblocking, this talk page will be protected and you'll be unable to edit it. _Gb^T/c 22:40, 2 February 2009 (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.

Please note that making insulting remarks about the people with the unblock button isn't usually an effective way to convince us to lift your block. —Travis ^talk 22:33, 2 February 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

My attitude is awful? you're an emasculated shell of a human being that throws its weight around by kissing asses of other admins like yourself so you can place badges on each others asses. Until you disprove what exactly constitutes advertising on my posts, you have no right, to claim to be right. Read on - "Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion.", - in Speedy Deletion" if the sentence does not make sense...ask someone smarter to hold your hand while they read it to you

Decline reason:

Ask someone more intelligent than yourself to read the reason that the previous unblock request was declined and then ask them to explain why you can no longer edit this page. _Gb^T/c 22:54, 2 February 2009 (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.

Possibly unfree File:JoeRodeo.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, File:JoeRodeo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image 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. — neuro^(talk) 20:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC) --— neuro^(talk) 20:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Joerodeo1.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Joerodeo1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image 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. — neuro^(talk) 20:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC) --— neuro^(talk) 20:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Joerodeo2.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Joerodeo2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image 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. — neuro^(talk) 20:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC) --— neuro^(talk) 20:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of AquaMaster

A tag has been placed on AquaMaster 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 company or corporation, 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 companies and corporations.

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 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. Fullstop (talk) 20:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Joerodeo1.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Joerodeo1.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 GFDL 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-en@wikimedia.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 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-en@wikimedia.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:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image 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 uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 01:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]