User talk:Jog2

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Gothamscreen.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Gothamscreen.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TheHoneytrapPoster.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:TheHoneytrapPoster.jpg. 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 21:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Gothamscreen08 postcard01aCor4.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Gothamscreen08 postcard01aCor4.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Skier Dude (talk) 03:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Gothamscreen09 postcard01b.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Gothamscreen09 postcard01b.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Skier Dude (talk) 03:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Striped Entertainment, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cold Blood (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Striped Entertainment, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Robert Banks and Anthony Green (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vivi Pineda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cartagena (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Vivi Pineda for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Vivi Pineda is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vivi Pineda until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. J04n(talk page) 13:56, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Occupant (film)

The article Occupant (film) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article has a WP:PROMO tone, but more importantly, it doesn't seem to meet WP:NFF. I cannot find any reviews of the film (0 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes), and searching independently only revealed a genre fan site review that doesn't provide a a staff page or masthead to indicate that they are WP:RS as opposed to WP:SELFPUBLISHED.

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}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 2pou (talk) 20:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello@2pou

I deproDed it as there's at least one acceptable review and a mildly notable cast. There are also 3 reviews at indeed blog-type review websites, so I didn't add them. It needs more. Will try and search more later. Best. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:07, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]