Thanks for uploading Image:Melstud2.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:CadutaW1.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Melstud2.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:11, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:DemillW1.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- OrphanBot 13:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Please read WP:MOS. Your use of indentations and caps aren't within the manner of style for Wikipedia. IrishGuy talk 22:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
The file File:VitlkW1.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:01, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
The file File:QuovadW1.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:02, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
The file File:Pathcam1.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:02, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
The file File:InferW1.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:03, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Barrysalt. We
welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things
you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a
conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the
conflict of interest guideline and
FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. MrOllie ( talk) 16:40, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Dear Mr.Ollie,
I don't see that there is "Conflict of Interest" in my contributions to the "History of Film" article of the kind described in your note above, anymore than there in anyone else's contribution. My contributions appear anonymous to the reader, as do all articles in Wikipedia. The anonymity of my contributions means that they do not increase my fame, nor can I make any money from them indirectly, so there is no self-promotion involved. (Further explantion of this point is available if necessary.) The necessity of reference to my own published writings (though as I said a reader of the article will not know they are mine) can be illustrated by the reference I tried to includede to my published article on early Danish Cinema. I am the only person who has written subject about this in English, based on the viewing of all the surviving Danish films of this period, and I think it is important for widening the scope of the "History of Cinema" entry beyond American cinema, as some people are requesting.
Please let me know what you think about this.
Barrysalt Barrysalt ( talk) 12:16, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Ollie,
Thank you for your prompt reply. I will leave out the general reference to my books. However, it is probably important that Film Style and Technology: History and Analysis is a standard text book, having gone through 3 editions, and sold many thousands of copies. I am proposing to fill in some of the citations requested for the History of Film article with some references to it. The
WP:UNDUE guidelines that you mention are directed solely against minority views. My opinions on early Danish cinema, and indeed other early cinemas, are obviously the majority view, since they have never been challenged after three decades or more.
please let me know what you think.
Barrysalt
Thanks for uploading Image:Melstud2.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:CadutaW1.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Melstud2.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:11, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:DemillW1.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- OrphanBot 13:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Please read WP:MOS. Your use of indentations and caps aren't within the manner of style for Wikipedia. IrishGuy talk 22:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
The file File:VitlkW1.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:01, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
The file File:QuovadW1.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:02, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
The file File:Pathcam1.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:02, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
The file File:InferW1.gif has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
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 files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 01:03, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Barrysalt. We
welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things
you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a
conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the
conflict of interest guideline and
FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. MrOllie ( talk) 16:40, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Dear Mr.Ollie,
I don't see that there is "Conflict of Interest" in my contributions to the "History of Film" article of the kind described in your note above, anymore than there in anyone else's contribution. My contributions appear anonymous to the reader, as do all articles in Wikipedia. The anonymity of my contributions means that they do not increase my fame, nor can I make any money from them indirectly, so there is no self-promotion involved. (Further explantion of this point is available if necessary.) The necessity of reference to my own published writings (though as I said a reader of the article will not know they are mine) can be illustrated by the reference I tried to includede to my published article on early Danish Cinema. I am the only person who has written subject about this in English, based on the viewing of all the surviving Danish films of this period, and I think it is important for widening the scope of the "History of Cinema" entry beyond American cinema, as some people are requesting.
Please let me know what you think about this.
Barrysalt Barrysalt ( talk) 12:16, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Ollie,
Thank you for your prompt reply. I will leave out the general reference to my books. However, it is probably important that Film Style and Technology: History and Analysis is a standard text book, having gone through 3 editions, and sold many thousands of copies. I am proposing to fill in some of the citations requested for the History of Film article with some references to it. The
WP:UNDUE guidelines that you mention are directed solely against minority views. My opinions on early Danish cinema, and indeed other early cinemas, are obviously the majority view, since they have never been challenged after three decades or more.
please let me know what you think.
Barrysalt