User talk:Milaneus

A tag has been placed on "Yale W", requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable (see the guidelines for notability here). If you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please write {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

Please read the criteria for speedy deletion (specifically, articles #7) and our general biography criteria. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. FreplySpang 00:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox header

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. You may make test edits in the sandbox, but for the convenience of others, please leave the sandbox heading alone. WikiMan53 T/C e@ edits 01:21, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion

A tag has been placed on Yale w, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Heimstern Läufer 01:18, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My page

Hello, "Milan", if you actually know me, read this message. Someone from an ip, probably YOU, vandalized my page today, and I had to revert it. You added "The Used" to my list, but I did not CREATE that article. Also, when you sign my autograph book, or any other page, like a TALK page, please use 4 tildes (~~~~) and be polite, or I may have to mark it as unsigned. Thank you. A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)} 00:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Please stop vandalizing my userpage. I can see who exactly edited it, so please stop. Please see WP:NPA, WP:N, and WP:VAND. A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)} 21:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please stop vandalizng my sigs page. I already had it semi-protected. I did not delete anything, your page still exsists, if you meant this one. I see you tried to recreate that article, so please don't recreate it until it becomes at least as notable as "courtesy blush", and even that might not be notable. If you would like to make experiments with articles, please use the sandbox, your userpage, or a subpage. Please read the above three links if you wish to prevent yourself from a block. Thank you. A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)} 18:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Defluous

A tag has been placed on Defluous, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the 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. ArglebargleIV 19:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Attacks in the article User talk:Steel359/Salt

Please do not make personal attacks on other people as you did at User talk:Steel359/Salt. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Retiono Virginian 19:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Used-artistportrett.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Used-artistportrett.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:07, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Defluous

There are notability guidelines for bands, and you failed to even assert that they satisfied them. Please note that inserting the word "notable" does not help, and even if you make those assertions, you must back them up using reliable sources. Thanks! Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 21:04, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

C & P move

Hey, a couple things: first, you're not really supposed to remove warnings from your talk page. Actually, there's not consensus on it, but it's controversial, so I wouldn't recommend it. Second, I noticed you moved Orange-cheeked Waxbill to Orange-cheeked Waxbill by cutting and pasting. Please see help:move, you're actually supposed to use the move button so it preserves the history. But it's cool, I'll fix it. Anyway, not to be a pain, sorry. Leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions or want to discuss anything. Peace, delldot talk 01:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all, it's fixed now, sorry to be a pain. Definitely let me know if you ever need any help with anything. Peace, delldot talk 01:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Orangecheekwaxbill01.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Orangecheekwaxbill01.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:42, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grip (tennis)

Why in the world did you do this? That is directly contrary to Wikipedia's style manual. I've moved it back. Michael Hardy (talk) 04:56, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Janko tipsarevic.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Janko tipsarevic.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 03:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Like the bot said above, Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. I see that you took the image from the ABC Australia website. We can't just take any image from a Google search engine, because they are often copyrighted. It is often discouraged to use a copyrighted image, unless you can succesfully write a Fair use rationale. Especially if a similar or identical free image is avalible that is not copyrighted, you should not upload a copyrighted image. Such can be considered copyright infingement. If you do not specify a fare use rationale, the image will likely be deleted. Thank you. ~A H 1^(TCU) 21:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please do not place STFU comments on my talkpage. Anyway, I never erased the image, and I never deleted anything. I'm just saying, copyrighted images will need a proper fair use rationale, or reason for using a copyrighted image. We can't just upload copyrighted images without permission or a reason for using it. We have no control over copyright laws, so we need to pay attention to copyright. See Wikipedia:Copyrights. I'm not an admin, I cannot delete any image files. I did not remove or touch the image or article in any way, shape, or form. The bot tagged the image for possible deletion because it was copyrighted and non-free without specifying why you added it. It's not me being mean, it's the law. Make sure you actually read all the copyright warnings displayed every time you upload. If you need further information, please either place {{helpme}} on your talkpage and your question, or go to the Help desk to ask your questions. International copyright is a very complicated issue, so make sure you understand all the laws, policies, and procedures prior to uploading any potentially non-free images. Thank you. ~A H 1^(TCU) 17:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image has been deleted as an obvious copyright infringement; see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Image:Janko Tipsarevic.jpg. Do not falsify image sources ever again, please, or you will lose your editing privileges. Sandstein (talk) 19:37, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Demo 2007 (Courtesy Blush)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Demo 2007 (Courtesy Blush), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Demo 2007 (Courtesy Blush). B. Wolterding (talk) 18:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Demo 2007 (Courtesy Blush)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Demo 2007 (Courtesy Blush), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Demo 2007 (Courtesy Blush). Thank you. (See my note on the article's talk page.) B. Wolterding (talk) 09:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Courtesy Blush Promo.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Courtesy Blush Promo.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 03:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Help!

Hi. Well, first I must say you've done quite a good job on articles related to Courtesy Blush. However, it's just this particular article that may be deleted. Per WP:MUSIC : Demos, mixtapes, bootlegs and promo-only records are in general not notable; however, they may be notable if they have independent coverage in reliable sources. So, it's the fact that it's a Demo, that it would be non-notable. However, you can still express your opinion at the AfD for the article. The other albums are fine, though. However, if you can get, say, an online news article or independant album review, that had been created by someone that is not involved in the band, and put it under "Notes", then maybe you could keep the article. Otherwise, it will likely remain deleted. Remember the AfD will be open until about Tusesday evening, so you can discuss as much as you want. However, I am still unable to do anything at the moment, as me editting it will not make it any more notable. Don't worry, I myself as had two of the articles I've created deleted, not to mention the redirects I created when I was a newbie. I've seen some of the articles you've created deleted too, not to mention the "Yale W" articles you created a long time ago, GRR. Try getting some sources into the article, as Demos need extra backup to show if they are notable. This isn't a speedy deletion, so you still have time. Speedy deletions get articles deleted in minutes. This used to be a prod, but now it's an AfD, and at an AfD you can more easily openly discuss your opinions about what people should do for the article. If enough people discuss and there is still no consensus to whether or not the article should be deleted, it would be kept under a "no consensus", although articles may be challenged once more. For example, an article on Daniel Brandt, member of Wikipedia Watch, survived 14 or so AfDs, with keep, no consensus, etc, before finally being deleted and salted forever. If you remember Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense, that was HUGE, lived for many years, survived half a dozen AfDs as well as Deletion reviews, GFDL complaints, for months before finally being deleted and moved to another website. So, try to do whatever you can to help the article, such as adding independant sources, asserting why the article should be kept, and discussing at the AfD. Remember that when Courtesy Blush releases another album, you can always create an article on that, provided it's hopefully not a Demo. Besides, you've done a lot of good work to show Courtesy Blush's notability (but please lay off the vandalism of my userspace and related pages). So, basicly, it's up to you, the creator of the article, to do whatever you can to show if it's notable. It's not that they don't like your article, it's just that they don't see enough notability in it. Try reading through WP:MUSIC and other notablity guidelines. Oh, and have you read the web-articles about the struggle between inclusionists and deletionists, as well as admins, policy-makers, arbiration commitee... Yuck. They're going to start world war five! So, anyway, good luck with your article. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 14:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. In case you wanted to know, Sweet Modern Fairy Tales and The Faces E.P. are up for prod (PROposed Deletion), if you object to the prod please do so. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 20:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If you object to the Prod, then feel free to contest the prod. Please remember to provide a reason, though. You may do this by removing the prod on the pages with a reason, or by commenting on the talkpage and notifying User:AllGloryToTheHypnotoad. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 21:10, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In case you wanted to know (PETA)

Hi. In case you wanted to know (well it was a few months ago), Wikipedia says: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals#Policy on euthanasia. If you believe some of this is incorrect or innacurate, or if you think some of the sources are unreliable, feel free to comment on the talkpage. However, if you think it is accurate enough and relaible, as well as NPOV, then don't comment at all. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 22:08, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Courtesy Blush

A tag has been placed on Courtesy Blush requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it 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 page (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. ... discospinster _talk 01:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Defluous.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Defluous.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media 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. —Bkell (talk) 06:40, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image permission problem with Image:Courtesy Blush.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Courtesy Blush.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media 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 GFDL 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-en@wikimedia.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 image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image 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 in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the image'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 uploaded by following this link. Images 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. JaGa^talk 18:48, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Courtesy-blush.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Courtesy-blush.jpg. 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 uploaded by following this link. 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. MBisanz ^talk 23:35, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Courtesy Blush Promo.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Courtesy Blush Promo.jpg. 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 uploaded by following this link. 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. Aspects (talk) 17:58, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Sweet-modern-fairy-tales.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Sweet-modern-fairy-tales.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 18:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:The Faces E.P..jpg

Thank you for uploading File:The Faces E.P..jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 18:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Demo 2007.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Demo 2007.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 18:03, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Courtesy Blush

The article Courtesy Blush has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Couldn't establish WP:NOTABILITY

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Boleyn (talk) 16:06, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]