User talk:Nhosko
Image copyright problem with Image:Emilio butragueno.jpg
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Emilio butragueno.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Because you are the image creator, you'll need to choose a suitable license tag from Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#For image creators. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 22:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
AfD Nomination: Ñhosko Serna
[edit]I've nominated the articles Ñhosko Serna and FootballDatabase for deletion under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Ñhosko Serna nor FootballDatabase satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. I have explained why in the nomination space (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ñhosko Serna. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them. You are free to edit the content of Ñhosko Serna during the discussion, but please do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top). Doing so will not end the discussion. -- All-Bran 19:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
La Raza
[edit]The original La Raza folded before the 2001 WISL season. The current team is a new team with the same name. There are two different articles for the San Diego Sockers beacause there were two teams that used that name. KitHutch 17:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
The new Sockers honored members of the old team as well. The new team even kept the old team's championship banners up. It's alright to honor and even acknowledge the old team. However, these are two separate franchises. The original La Raza ceased operations in 2001. The new team is an expansion franchise. The only connection between the two is the name. The names even have different logos. Another example is the San Jose Earthquakes. There were two different Earthquakes' teams. The old one played in the NASL and the current one will play in MLS. The MLS team acknowledges that NASL team, but they are two separate franchises. I wouldn't mind both La Raza teams sharing the same article as long as it is acknowledged that there were two separate teams. KitHutch 18:17, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Freising's Marienplatz.jpg
[edit]
Thank you for uploading Image:Freising's Marienplatz.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sdrtirs (talk) 21:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
