User talk:Seaghdha

Welcome!

Hello, Seaghdha, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 22:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citation tags

It is against policy to remove citation needed tags, and attempts to remove such tags without providing sources means the information would normally be removed until a source is found. However, I will not do that at this time, and will give the opportunity to find sources still. If you have issue with how many tags appear, either find sources for the information given or remove the unsourced material so the tags may be removed. If no sources can be found, it means the article would need be deleted, failing to prove notability per Wikipedia:Notability. Also, simply adding external links in the middle of articles is frowned upon, see Wikipedia:Citing sources on how to properly cite materials.

[tk] XANDERLIPTAK 18:33, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You realize those articles you linked to do cite where they found birth information? Again, a lead is a summary of the body of the article, and when the body is properly sourced the lead does not need to be. Rather than make unwarranted attacks, I will again insist you read up on Wikipedia policy that I linked for you. You will see that the editors who added the information are responsible for properly sourcing their additions, not I. That it would have been perfectly acceptable to delete the unsourced information, but instead I let it stay and merely pointed out to editors what would need to be improved.

I am not sure why Jamison took such offense that his article be treated like every other article, or why you and his other Facebook fans jumped at his beck and call and likewise took it so personally that his article require sourcing.

[tk] XANDERLIPTAK 03:12, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Tags continued

The one valid point above is the bit about Wikipedia conventions 'frowning' on inline external links. However, it is ridiculous to suggest that every single sentence requires a citation. It is also insulting to add 'citation needed' after the listing of parents of a living person. Are you attempting to be rude? It may be 'against policy' to remove citation tags, but that does not give an editor license to use them as an annoyance. It is absurd to hid behind 'policy' when you are clearly doing something that is meant merely to be irritating.

If the assertion that every single statement (such as birth dates, names of parents, academic degrees, etc.) in a biographical article requires a citation, virtually every biographical article in Wikipedia fails your test. On the other hand, it seems that Mr. Jamieson's article is of particular interest to you, as you have not attempted to litter hundreds of other biographies with 'citation needed' tags. One cannot help but wonder why.

Seaghdha (talk) 02:21, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You seem unfamiliar with citation, and clearly didn't read policy, so let me explain it. Let us say you have a lengthy paragraph of 10 sentences, with 30 different facts and assertions littered through it. You do not need 30 citations, nor do you need 10; you can have jsut one citation if that one source verifies all 30 facts through all 10 sentences. You simply add it at the end of the paragraph.

As to this claim it is rude to ask for a source for birth information, including parents' names, I am at a loss on that one. How exactly is that rude?

Oh, and myself and two other editors caught Jamieson trying to advertise his services in the Heraldry and Coat of arms articles. He was was rebuked for it, and it warranted a review of his article. Common procedure, just to make sure that Jamieson is not trying to use Wikipedia to advertise or self-promote.

[tk] XANDERLIPTAK 03:12, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Biography article

Thanks for your note and your work on Wikipedia! The reason there was such a strong reaction to the bio is that Wikipedia strongly discourages writing autobiography. The concern is one of neutrality for the encyclopedia, as well as verifiability. In many cases, autobiographical articles lean much more toward the positive than a neutrally written article. Keep in mind, the page may (and in fact, almost certainly will) be edited by others. There are many people who don't want an article about themselves on Wikipedia. For instance, if the subject of an article is charged with a crime and that's reported in a verifiable source, it may well be added to the article. The details of a person's life rapidly become very public and easily accessed, even if the subject would prefer to keep it out of the article. Biographical articles are covered neutrally, without favor or disfavor to the subject, which is perhaps a more public life than many people would like to have. Let me know if there's anything I can help with. --TeaDrinker (talk) 05:26, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

September 2010

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 16:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Russell Woollen

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Russell Woollen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Singularity42 (talk) 15:47, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How to verify copyright permission for article Russell Woollen

Hello, Seaghdha.

Thank you for your interest in donating material from Patrick M. O'Shea's dissertation to Wikipedia. Since we do not currently have a method in place to verify such things within Wikipedia, we must verify such donations through external processes. The article has been blanked to allow time for that verification to proceed.

The simplest way to verify is, if the dissertation is published online, to place a release on that external website putting the material into public domain or co-licensing it under CC-BY-SA and GFDL, which permit modification and reuse, even commercially, as long as authorship credit is given. This release is irrevocable and must continue to be displayed, or the material may need to be removed. A statement such as the following would be sufficient: "The contents of this website (or page, if you are specifically releasing one section) are available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0 and the GNU Free Documentation License, unversioned with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts." If you decide to take this route, please put a link to that release on Talk:Russell Woollen so we can restore the contents.

Alternatively, you may choose to have Mr. O'Shea send an e-mail to the Wikimedia Foundation to permissions-en@wikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL. There is a boilerplate release form at Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries which can be helpful. Please ask him to specify by name the articles on Wikipedia in which the material is being used and to detail the publication history of the dissertation. Once your e-mail is received and processed by a member of the Communications Committee, the article's contents will be restored if your release is legally sufficient. Please make a note that you've done this on Talk:Russell Woollen to help guard against premature deletion of the page. You can compose a note or very simply paste the following on the talk page, brackets and all: {{OTRS pending}}

If Mr. O'Shea decides he doesn't wish to release the material into public domain or under the terms of CC-BY-SA and GFDL, you are welcome to rewrite the text from scratch at this temporary page. As long as the material is otherwise compliant with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, it will be used to replace the previous contents. Please leave a note at Talk:Russell Woollen saying you have done so.

We apologize for the additional steps necessary, but as copyright is a matter of legal concern, we must ensure that we not only protect the rights of copyright holders, but also guard the Wikipedia project against inadvertent infringement.

Before verifying permission, please first review the material to ensure that is compliant with Wikipedia's requirements for verifiability and neutrality and does not contain "original research". (If you are closely related to the subject matter, you may also want to read our conflict of interest guidelines; if you are unfamiliar with Wikipedia, you should review Wikipedia:Starting an article or Wikipedia:Your first article.) Even if permission is verified, material may be modified or removed if it is otherwise inconsistent with our policies and guidelines.

The article will be revisited in about a week to see what additional steps have been taken or may be necessary. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to let me know at my talk page. We also have a help desk which is typically manned around the clock by volunteers.

Thank you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 23:43, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Russell Woollen

The article Russell Woollen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Copyright violation, albeit in good faith. The edit summary for the initial page creation states "Text reproduced from Chapter 1 of of the cited doctoral dissertation, used by permission" but permission does not seem to have been assigned appropriately per wikipedia policies. Also, issues of notability.

While all 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. andy (talk) 23:38, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gaelic nobility of Ireland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page O'Connell (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) 09:01, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2017

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Yuhi VI of Rwanda. I noticed that when you added the image to the infobox, you added it as a thumbnail. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this:

|image=[[File:SomeImage.jpg|thumb|Some image caption]]

Instead just supply the name of the image. So in this case you can simply do:

|image=SomeImage.jpg.

There will then be a separate parameter for the image caption such as |caption=Some image caption. Please note that this is a generic form message I am leaving on your page because you recently added a thumbnail to an infobox. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using! Please consult the Template page for the infobox being used to see better documentation. Thanks! Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 00:28, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Hello, I'm CorbieVreccan. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Eóganachta, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 23:02, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:OShea.jpg

The file File:OShea.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Personal file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use

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

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 08:58, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:TerenceMcCarthy.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:TerenceMcCarthy.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. 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 after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. 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 MifterBot. 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. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 16:45, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]