A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Clifton College Biology Lesson.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bob Re-born ( talk) 22:50, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Clifton College Biology Lesson.jpg. 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 created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster ( talk) 23:38, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's
no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or
synthesis into articles, as you did at
Clifton College, you may be
blocked from editing. I suggest you read both
WP:V and
WP:OR before adding anything more to the article.
Bob Re-born (
talk)
05:41, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey Warbo. Please read Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors when you have a moment. Thanks! -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 18:04, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you add
unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at
Clifton College, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
Charles (
talk)
22:45, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello.
When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 22:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Clifton College shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. -- Charles ( talk) 23:07, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello there! Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm Master of Puppets; you can call me mop, though.
I apologize if you feel you've been attacked for no reason. From what I can gather, Bob Re-born removed some unsourced content that you added about your school. It doesn't seem like anyone took the time to explain what the issue is, though, so I once again apologize for all these warnings.
Here at Wikipedia, we rely on verifiability through reliable sources. Essentially, every statement that is not common knowledge requires a source from a reputable organization proving the statement's truthfulness. For example, in this case, a link to the school's website where they display the tie would be sufficient, or anything similar.
It's important to clarify that you are not being reverted because people think you're lying; it's nothing personal. Rather, we have to treat everything as unproven unless it can be sourced. This way, we can guarantee that readers coming to our website receive quality information. If we didn't follow our sourcing policies, Wikipedia would be littered with anecdotes and misleading information.
Hopefully this clears things up! If you have any questions, feel free to ask me here or on my talk page (don't forget to sign your edits to talk pages with four tildes, like so: ~~~~).
For now, if you could refrain from adding unsourced information, that would be wonderful. If you find a source you think is sufficient, feel free to run it by me! Cheers, m.o.p 23:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
OK, I can only stretch good faith so far. Please refrain from editing Clifton College until further notice. Edit summaries like this or this are not constructive in any way. Please note that editing Wikipedia is a privilege, not a right; if you continue to act disruptively, I will block you. I'd recommend you look over our core policies (specifically the one on civility) and discuss any edits you'd like to make on the article's talk page. As always, if you have any questions, feel free to let me know. m.o.p 00:10, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
OK. I was only acting that way due to the refering of me as a child. Not in fact a true statement. I would like a further explanation as to why my photograph seems to you as not good for the page. Warboism ( talk) 00:15, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
I see the discussion about deleting the photograph is still continuing. If you think it should be kept, I suggest you ask Dr Grohmann to fill out the form (the part in the black box) at WP:CONSENT and email it to permissions-en@wikimedia.org - he would list himself as the copyright holder and would list the link to the image ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Clifton_College_Biology_Lesson.jpg ) as "the work to be released". For "SENDER'S NAME AND DETAILS" he could merely put his name and email address. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 12:20, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello! Warboism,
you are invited to the
Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us!
|
I believe they also have coffee, and cola, and other forms of what the Americans call "pop" :-) -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 21:22, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did to
Clifton College, without
verifying it by citing a
reliable source. Please review the guidelines at
Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.
Charles (
talk)
23:30, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The Facebook photo won't work for any of our readers who don't use Facebook. As we said before - we're not accusing you of lying. This is just how the policy works. You have to source additions that are not common knowledge, and that's that. Also, I don't think Demiurge is patronizing you - remember that we're trying to help. A photograph just isn't an ideal reference. If you can't source the information, perhaps it's better to improve the article in ways that can be sourced? m.o.p 00:46, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
To answer your other question, I do actually agree that it's ridiculous that you can't add this information, but that's just how Wikipedia is at the moment. So please bear with us while we work on fixing this :) -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 00:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Demiurge for all your sage advice.
Warboism: if you'd like, you're welcome to talk about intended edits on the article's talk page, located at Talk:Clifton College. There, other editors can weigh in and discuss said edits. Also, you may present a source (preferably not a picture) there for the house tie information. I'll check in with you after you've done that and we can go from there.
I apologize if this is overwhelming or seems anal - if I could make it easier I would! However, as you can imagine, coordinating tens of thousands of volunteer editors over millions of articles would be very hard without stringent rules and followup. While your way may be easier, it doesn't scale to a project as large as Wikipedia. m.o.p 02:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The random school uniform award |
Congratulations on finding, and citing, a suitable source. Great job! -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 23:29, 22 March 2013 (UTC) |
So, master W. Ism, isn't it a curious coincidence that one of the people edit-warring with you on Clifton College also nominated the article about its headmaster for deletion?
I don't think you need to comment there, as things seems to be well under control, but you should probably watchlist the discussion, as you may find it interesting as an example of how things sometimes work correctly on Wikipedia. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 23:40, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Warboism. Unfortunately, simply finding an image on Google does not mean it is in the public domain. We are, however, allowed to use copyrighted images of deceased people if we can't find a replacement (see #10 at WP:NFCI). As the subject is recently deceased, in order to use a non-free image you'll have to show that a decent attempt has been made to find a free alternative. Any images that are uploaded under that rationale will have to have full details of their source, author and copyright status—simply finding them through Google Images is not sufficient. Thanks, matt ( talk) 13:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
The article Matt Bartsch has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted 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}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Eeekster ( talk) 21:43, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
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 Matt Bartsch 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 person or group of people, 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 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 "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. Eeekster ( talk) 21:44, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
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 Matt Bartsch 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 person or group of people, 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 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 "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. - Voidz ( t· c) 22:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Channel icon of Miffby.jpg, which you've attributed to Matt Bartsch. 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 created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dianna ( talk) 04:28, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Mkdw. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of
your recent contributions to
Clifton College because it did not appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks!
Mkdw
talk
21:37, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Lugia2453. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of
your recent contributions, such as the one you made with
this edit to
Chicago, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
Lugia2453 (
talk)
21:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
United States with
this edit. Your edits appear to constitute
vandalism and have been
reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox.
Administrators have the ability to
block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in
vandalism. Thank you.
Pharaoh of the Wizards (
talk)
21:49, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Antiqueight. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of
your recent contributions, such as the one you made with
this edit to
Pansexuality, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
🍺 Antiqueight
confer
19:00, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
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 Rose Bowl Awards 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, corporation or organization that 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 deleted 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. Onel5969 TT me 15:36, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Rose Bowl Awards, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Troutfarm27
(Talk)
07:19, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, StarGeck. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Rose Bowl Awards, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for
article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 08:01, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Clifton College Biology Lesson.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Bob Re-born ( talk) 22:50, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Clifton College Biology Lesson.jpg. 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 created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster ( talk) 23:38, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Please stop your
disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's
no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or
synthesis into articles, as you did at
Clifton College, you may be
blocked from editing. I suggest you read both
WP:V and
WP:OR before adding anything more to the article.
Bob Re-born (
talk)
05:41, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey Warbo. Please read Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors when you have a moment. Thanks! -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 18:04, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you add
unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at
Clifton College, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice.
Charles (
talk)
22:45, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello.
When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 22:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Clifton College shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. -- Charles ( talk) 23:07, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello there! Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm Master of Puppets; you can call me mop, though.
I apologize if you feel you've been attacked for no reason. From what I can gather, Bob Re-born removed some unsourced content that you added about your school. It doesn't seem like anyone took the time to explain what the issue is, though, so I once again apologize for all these warnings.
Here at Wikipedia, we rely on verifiability through reliable sources. Essentially, every statement that is not common knowledge requires a source from a reputable organization proving the statement's truthfulness. For example, in this case, a link to the school's website where they display the tie would be sufficient, or anything similar.
It's important to clarify that you are not being reverted because people think you're lying; it's nothing personal. Rather, we have to treat everything as unproven unless it can be sourced. This way, we can guarantee that readers coming to our website receive quality information. If we didn't follow our sourcing policies, Wikipedia would be littered with anecdotes and misleading information.
Hopefully this clears things up! If you have any questions, feel free to ask me here or on my talk page (don't forget to sign your edits to talk pages with four tildes, like so: ~~~~).
For now, if you could refrain from adding unsourced information, that would be wonderful. If you find a source you think is sufficient, feel free to run it by me! Cheers, m.o.p 23:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
OK, I can only stretch good faith so far. Please refrain from editing Clifton College until further notice. Edit summaries like this or this are not constructive in any way. Please note that editing Wikipedia is a privilege, not a right; if you continue to act disruptively, I will block you. I'd recommend you look over our core policies (specifically the one on civility) and discuss any edits you'd like to make on the article's talk page. As always, if you have any questions, feel free to let me know. m.o.p 00:10, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
OK. I was only acting that way due to the refering of me as a child. Not in fact a true statement. I would like a further explanation as to why my photograph seems to you as not good for the page. Warboism ( talk) 00:15, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
I see the discussion about deleting the photograph is still continuing. If you think it should be kept, I suggest you ask Dr Grohmann to fill out the form (the part in the black box) at WP:CONSENT and email it to permissions-en@wikimedia.org - he would list himself as the copyright holder and would list the link to the image ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Clifton_College_Biology_Lesson.jpg ) as "the work to be released". For "SENDER'S NAME AND DETAILS" he could merely put his name and email address. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 12:20, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello! Warboism,
you are invited to the
Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us!
|
I believe they also have coffee, and cola, and other forms of what the Americans call "pop" :-) -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 21:22, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did to
Clifton College, without
verifying it by citing a
reliable source. Please review the guidelines at
Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.
Charles (
talk)
23:30, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The Facebook photo won't work for any of our readers who don't use Facebook. As we said before - we're not accusing you of lying. This is just how the policy works. You have to source additions that are not common knowledge, and that's that. Also, I don't think Demiurge is patronizing you - remember that we're trying to help. A photograph just isn't an ideal reference. If you can't source the information, perhaps it's better to improve the article in ways that can be sourced? m.o.p 00:46, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
To answer your other question, I do actually agree that it's ridiculous that you can't add this information, but that's just how Wikipedia is at the moment. So please bear with us while we work on fixing this :) -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 00:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Demiurge for all your sage advice.
Warboism: if you'd like, you're welcome to talk about intended edits on the article's talk page, located at Talk:Clifton College. There, other editors can weigh in and discuss said edits. Also, you may present a source (preferably not a picture) there for the house tie information. I'll check in with you after you've done that and we can go from there.
I apologize if this is overwhelming or seems anal - if I could make it easier I would! However, as you can imagine, coordinating tens of thousands of volunteer editors over millions of articles would be very hard without stringent rules and followup. While your way may be easier, it doesn't scale to a project as large as Wikipedia. m.o.p 02:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The random school uniform award |
Congratulations on finding, and citing, a suitable source. Great job! -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 23:29, 22 March 2013 (UTC) |
So, master W. Ism, isn't it a curious coincidence that one of the people edit-warring with you on Clifton College also nominated the article about its headmaster for deletion?
I don't think you need to comment there, as things seems to be well under control, but you should probably watchlist the discussion, as you may find it interesting as an example of how things sometimes work correctly on Wikipedia. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 23:40, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Warboism. Unfortunately, simply finding an image on Google does not mean it is in the public domain. We are, however, allowed to use copyrighted images of deceased people if we can't find a replacement (see #10 at WP:NFCI). As the subject is recently deceased, in order to use a non-free image you'll have to show that a decent attempt has been made to find a free alternative. Any images that are uploaded under that rationale will have to have full details of their source, author and copyright status—simply finding them through Google Images is not sufficient. Thanks, matt ( talk) 13:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
The article Matt Bartsch has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted 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}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Eeekster ( talk) 21:43, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
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 Matt Bartsch 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 person or group of people, 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 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 "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. Eeekster ( talk) 21:44, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
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 Matt Bartsch 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 person or group of people, 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 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 "Click here to 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, you can place a request here. - Voidz ( t· c) 22:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Channel icon of Miffby.jpg, which you've attributed to Matt Bartsch. 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 created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
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 on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dianna ( talk) 04:28, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Mkdw. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of
your recent contributions to
Clifton College because it did not appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks!
Mkdw
talk
21:37, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Lugia2453. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of
your recent contributions, such as the one you made with
this edit to
Chicago, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
Lugia2453 (
talk)
21:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at
United States with
this edit. Your edits appear to constitute
vandalism and have been
reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox.
Administrators have the ability to
block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in
vandalism. Thank you.
Pharaoh of the Wizards (
talk)
21:49, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
Antiqueight. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of
your recent contributions, such as the one you made with
this edit to
Pansexuality, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
🍺 Antiqueight
confer
19:00, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
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 Rose Bowl Awards 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, corporation or organization that 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 deleted 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. Onel5969 TT me 15:36, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
An article you recently created,
Rose Bowl Awards, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from
reliable,
independent sources. (
?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (
verifiability is of
central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to
draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's
general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.
Troutfarm27
(Talk)
07:19, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, StarGeck. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Rose Bowl Awards, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for
article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 08:01, 16 August 2021 (UTC)