Hi. The fact that other couples may or may not have their own articles isn't a sufficient reason to have one for these two - please refer to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The article still has to meet the same standards for notability as every other article. Since there appears nothing about the 'couple' that isn't covered by their own articles, I don't believe that any notability is established. CultureDrone ( talk) 19:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Ultimatehela.png. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI ( talk) 03:52, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Tarty.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- FairuseBot ( talk) 13:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate your effort to make sure that the Maggie Gallagher article was correctly placed. However, the Wikipedia standard is that articles should use the name that the person is most commony known by; while Maggie Gallagher may not be her legal name, it is the name her articles appear on, it's how she identifies herself in connection with her activism. As such, I've had the page restored to Maggie Gallagher, with a forward to that site from the other name. - Nat Gertler ( talk) 00:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi. The fact that other couples may or may not have their own articles isn't a sufficient reason to have one for these two - please refer to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The article still has to meet the same standards for notability as every other article. Since there appears nothing about the 'couple' that isn't covered by their own articles, I don't believe that any notability is established. CultureDrone ( talk) 19:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Ultimatehela.png. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI ( talk) 03:52, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Tarty.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- FairuseBot ( talk) 13:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate your effort to make sure that the Maggie Gallagher article was correctly placed. However, the Wikipedia standard is that articles should use the name that the person is most commony known by; while Maggie Gallagher may not be her legal name, it is the name her articles appear on, it's how she identifies herself in connection with her activism. As such, I've had the page restored to Maggie Gallagher, with a forward to that site from the other name. - Nat Gertler ( talk) 00:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)