User talk:InspiredMind

License tagging for Image:NickHeadshotInternet.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:NickHeadshotInternet.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Color Headshot.JPG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you uploaded the same image twice: as Image:Color Headshot.JPG and also as Image:484 color very small.JPG. The latter copy of the file has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and remember exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 21:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:484 b&w very small.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:484 b&w very small.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:06, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

DVD cover

Unspecified source for Image:DVD Box.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:DVD Box.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:07, 15 April 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. You also need to give the DVD cover a less generic name to avoid image naming conflics. Mgm|^(talk) 22:07, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicts of Interest

Hi there. You appear to be connected to the subjects that you are writing about. This is discouraged by our policy on conflicts of interest. Please take the time to review this (link is in the header). You may also wish to view biography guidelines & movie guidelines to understand the notability requirements for articles. Feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, here, or add {{helpme}} to your talk page if you need any help with anything. Cheers. --Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Footer Movies Nick Krasnic

Template:Footer Movies Nick Krasnic has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Grey

Please don't keep inserting the link to your film into that article. If you check the article external links you already have a link. One is enough. How many more do you want? Please don't spam wikipedia to promote your work - its decidedly not cool. --Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I have edited the article 3 times today to remove your links I have posted to the Admin Noticeboard to ask for a second opinion and because I do not with to break the Rules on reverting. You are well over this but I suspect you were not aware and I have taken no action. I'm sorry to appear harrassing you - You will be glad to know I'm going to bed and will not be editing further tonight. --Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on my talk page demonstrate a complete lack of understanding about what wikipedia is

What is the problem with providing a link to the film's official webpage? What is the problem with creating a Wiki page for the film- which was officially distributed by one of the leading documentary distributors? This is not promotion, I haven't posted anything regarding the sale or purchase of the movie. I am making information about the film accessible. This is what the site is for. Who the hell are you anyway? Are you an official Wikipedia employee? Stop interfering with my work. Get a life.

There is nothing wrong with a link - there was one in the correct place - the external link section. You do not have the right to use wikipedia as a promotional tool for your work. You are not supposed to edit where you have a conflict of interest. Please read up on The Five Pillars that underpin our project and you may see what I'm on about. Oh, and I have a life thanks. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:37, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]