User talk:NorCal4Life

Copyright images

Please review Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images and media, especially numbers 3, 4, 6, & 9. If an image can not pass those points, you can approach the Wikimedia foundation for a OTRS confirmation - [1] as proof of permission of the actual author/creator of the image. Second-hand claims like "I got permission from XYZ to publish this" must be substantiated. SkierRMH (talk) 23:30, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Gym 445

A tag has been placed on Gym 445 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it 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 you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (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. Carados (talk) 19:41, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Gym445.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gym445.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Angry hick 2007.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:57, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Joseph Kropschot

The article Joseph Kropschot has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has 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/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:07, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Joseph Kropschot

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Joseph Kropschot 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 real person or group of people, but it does not credibly 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:08, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joseph Kropschot for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph Kropschot 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/Joseph Kropschot 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. PRehse (talk) 12:10, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Joseph Kropschot

The article Joseph Kropschot has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has 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/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 02:16, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

about the deletion review

Hey, you did good with your deletion review posting at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 September 25, and, amazingly, the article has been restored. I was trying to help there but I did not expect this to work out for you. Please, please, do develop the article now. Do you have some sources, e.g. newspaper articles or whatever, that can be cited with inline citations, e.g. <ref>article name, author, date, newspaper</ref>. You have a short reprieve but the existing tags on the article are threatening its deletion if it is not improved. Again, though, congratulations on having survived deletion review, there oughta be a t-shirt about it! --Doncram (talk) 03:56, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration of Article

Thank you so much. I'm not an expert at Wikipedia but I'm trying. I will definitely develop the article in the next day or two and add lots of references. Thanks again for your help! NorCal4Life (talk) 05:11, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi NorCal. I did place a BLPPROD on the article, but @Doncram: removed it. I disagree with that removal, especially since the only source is a mere mention of statistics and covers absolutely nothing about the person. But I'm not here to argue that. I'm here to see what kind of sources you intend to post so you don't put too much work into things that still aren't notable. I took this action of talking to you over simply taking it to WP:AFD for a 7 day discussion about it's deletion. So I do come in good faith. I can hold off a day or two, but I really don't like leaving unreferenced material about BLPs on a page. I agree with @Athaenara: that this should have remained deleted per the previous AFD, but again, I nominated instead. I took a look around google, and none of the "news" sources nor any regular links would suffice to have the article meet the notability guideline, much less meet the required general notability guideline. How do you see this person meeting either case? -- Amanda (aka DQ) 07:31, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joseph Kropschot for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph Kropschot 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/Joseph Kropschot (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. PRehse (talk) 10:13, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As you have seen, User:PRehse went ahead with the 2nd AFD, and you can see at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Kropschot (2nd nomination) how that is going (not well for prospects of keeping the article). Please do see discussion there of wp:NMMA standard, but note that substantial coverage meeting general wp:GNG guidelines is more important, would overrule that standard. A little while ago I tried searching for any new coverage of the Kropschot's bout that was supposed to happen this last weekend but did not find anything. If you do have new or old sources which you can link to, it would be great if you could provide a list of them in the AFD discussion. Offline sources can be valid, too. You don't have to use them to develop the article (which could require more effort); you can just supply a list of them in the AFD. That will permanently record the sources, while the article might disappear again soon, and would be available in the future (if/when the article is re-created again, if it seems clear that Kropschot meets NMMA or GNG standards). Perhaps you do have sources which could save the current article, or perhaps it's time to cut losses for a while, I dunno. Anyhow, good luck with your other Wikipedia editing endeavors, and I hope this has been at least educational. :) --Doncram (talk) 19:41, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Joseph Kropschot.png

Thanks for uploading File:Joseph Kropschot.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for 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-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 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-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}} 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 in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 02:23, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings and Salutations

To NorCal4Life:

Hello! And Congratulations!

You have been included in my first, and possibly only, Very Early Christmas List!

As an earnest fellow believer in Santa Claus, and possibly in Our Redeemer Liveth as well, you may wonder how you got on this list. I have no idea!

Actually, I do. You first introduced yourself to me after I deleted a page that had been tagged for speedy deletion per WP:CSD#G4 as an article previously deleted per WP:AFD. I wasn't enthusiastic about restoring the page but you followed through very smartly by opening a deletion review which did lead ultimately to restoration of the page.

That it was again deleted per a subsequent second Afd is neither here nor there, you behaved admirably, even professionally, throughout, probably inspiring lingering respect in several other editors.

All the best for you and yours this Christmas 2018 and New Year 2019!

– Athaenara jingles all the way 08:26, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]