User talk:Caseykextreme

Please do not add advertising or inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. -- Mwanner | Talk 20:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:EBMV54Coversml.png

Thanks for uploading Image:EBMV54Coversml.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 19:46, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 2008

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Carl.bunderson (talk) 21:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Extreme Boats Magazine

A tag has been placed on Extreme Boats Magazine requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, 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 this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

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 article (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. Carl.bunderson (talk) 21:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:Anthony Appleyard#Boating Page edits. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Vandalism"

Per official policy, on Wikipedia "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." Furthermore, "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism." There is no policy or guideline requiring that editors be "domain experts" in articles they edit. Editing an article in an area you lack expertise is not vandalism. This is a good thing! An editor outside of his domain can certainly do administrative work and minor editing. They also bring a more neutral eye to the topic. Since an article should be understandable to non-experts, they can help make the article clearer. If a well meaning but relatively clueless editor harms an article, it's a good sign that the article needs improvement so that future clueless editors don't make similar mistakes. Finally, please do not call good faith edits by other editors "vandalism" and make threats of "reporting" them for vandalism. [1][2] Accusing someone of vandalism is extremely rude, and it could easily be taken as your attempting to silence opposition as opposed to discussing disagreements with an open mind with an eye toward consensus. — Alan De Smet | Talk 05:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]