User talk:Meranti

Hello. Concerning your contribution, The specification of depth, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.feswa.org/PPPEDIA/Depth_specification.htm. As a copyright violation, The specification of depth appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. The specification of depth has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:The specification of depth. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at The specification of depth, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. NawlinWiki 14:52, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recreation of article

Hello. Concerning your contribution, The specification of depth, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.feswa.org/PPPEDIA/Depth_specification.htm. As a copyright violation, The specification of depth appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. The specification of depth has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:The specification of depth. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at The specification of depth, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Jhinman 09:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikification of "Driller's depth"

Just thought I'd do the courtesy of telling you that I'm going to wikify Driller's depth. If you want to do this yourself, let me know, OK?

Have a nice day! Scraimer (talk) 06:35, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Effective porosity 2.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Effective porosity 2.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. Skier Dude (talk) 23:16, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright attribution

I wanted to let you know that I just listed Driller's depth at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 April 24. While I trust that you are authorized to release that content, present best practice is to follow the instructions at WP:CONSENT in order to make sure that the Wikimedia Foundation has a record of the copyright status. Right now, Wikipedia users and the WMF don't have sufficient information to verify that you are a representative of the copyright holder—and therefore can't necessarily rely on the attribution you made on the article's talk page.

The WP:CP listing applies principally to the text of that article, but the WP:CONSENT procedure can (and should) also be used for images (such as the figures you included in the article), even if you've already marked them with a GFDL tag. TheFeds 20:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:SpecDepth2.gif

Thanks for uploading File:SpecDepth2.gif. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

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-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, 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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 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. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:35, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We also need you to verify the licensing of File:SpecDepth1.gif. The same processes will resolve these concerns. I apologize for the complication, but as above I'm afraid that we do need an official release on record. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:35, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]