User talk:Abhilekhvirdi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Bcscrest.JPG

Thank you for uploading Image:Bcscrest.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) 11:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Batch1978.jpg

Thanks for uploading Batch1978.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 05:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Tarsem.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Tarsem.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. Additionally, if you continue uploading bad images, you may be blocked from uploading. STBotI (talk) 17:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image source problem with Image:Batch1978.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Batch1978.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, 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, 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}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. 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. 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 16:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 16:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:RFarran.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:RFarran.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}} 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 01:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 01:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image source problem with Image:Batch1978.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Batch1978.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, 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, 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}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. 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. 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 17:01, 24 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 17:01, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Bishop Cotton. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Relata refero (disp.) 17:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:RFarran.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:RFarran.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hawks' Club

Please justify your insertion of members whose notability we have no evidence for. If they are that notable, write an article on them so they are not redlinks. I have given my reasons on the Talk:Hawks' Club. Please do the same and give your reasons there. It is quite common to only list members, alumni etc. if they have an article. --Bduke (talk) 11:09, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

You are continuing to ignore this point and are reverting the removal of redlinks to members of the Club. I am going to keep out of this argument as an administrator. If you continue to add this material without giving any justification, then you are likely to be blocked from editing wikipedia for disruption. When your edits are challenged, as these clearly have, you must give reasons both in an edit summary and on the talk page. --Bduke (talk) 23:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I see you are continuing to re-insert this material without giving a reason or discussing it on the talk page. This is your last warning. If you insert it again after it has been removed, I will block you from editing wikipedia. These edits of yours are disruptive. This time, take note. --Bduke (talk) 23:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reminder

Please stop adding details about BCS to all sorts of articles; that is ruled out in our policies, specifically WP:UNDUE. "Famous and prestigious" is not a good idea either, under WP:PEACOCK. --Relata refero (disp.) 09:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Please also read WP:3RR and WP:CONSENSUS. --Relata refero (disp.) 18:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Old_Cottonians_Tie.JPG

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Old_Cottonians_Tie.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image 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. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Maj.R.k.von Goldstein.jpg missing description details

Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:26, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] May 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Moninder Singh Pandher. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Closedmouth (talk) 14:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bcscrests.JPG}

Thank you for uploading Image:Bcscrests.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:04, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Relata refero (disp.) 15:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of a week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

.

You have been given plenty of warning which you chose to ignore. See the section above on the Hawks' Club. It is unacceptable to keep adding back material that several editors have indicated is not welcomed, particularly if, as you have done, no argument for the inclusion of the material is given either in an edit summary or on the talk page of the article. I am more than willing to remove your block if you enter into a fruitful discussion on the talk page of the articles you have been disrupting. If you do not do that and then at the end of your block carry on disrupting wikipedia, you will be blocked for a longer period or even indefinitely. It is up to you. --Bduke (talk) 23:23, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I see that you have returned after being blocked and continued with exactly the same disruptive editing without discussing matters in edit summaries on the talk page. I also noticed that you almost certainly made a disruptive edit, identical to the others, as a IP editor while you were banned. Please, please listen to us. Join in and discuss your edits on the talk page. Make a productive contribution to wikipedia. If you do not, you will be banned again and this time for an even longer period. --Bduke (talk) 22:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I see you are continuing to disrupt R. K. von Goldstein by adding material that is POV and that you continue to not explain your edits on the talk page or in an edit summary. This is your last warning. If you make another edit like that, you will be blocked again. --Bduke (talk) 01:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)