User talk:Feudonym

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Feudonym, 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 ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  --♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪ walkie-talkie 07:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cover-front.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Cover-front.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 11:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Ashwednesday.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ashwednesday.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 12:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Civility

In a recent edit, you called Betacommand a 'piece of shit'. Just because you used an acronym doesn't change the fact that it's a personal attack, incivil, and has no place on this project. I understand that you're frustrated, but that's an unacceptable way to respond. Please use better judgment in the future and take a moment to review the WP:NPA policy. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Images were deleted even though I added two sets of lengthy fair use rationales for each. (also pos could mean anything :)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:The Kinks-Ultimate collection.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:The Kinks-Ultimate collection.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 (talk) 21:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pieces of April

Hello! I'm curious why you arbitrarily changed some but not all of the awards and nominations listed to bold face print. If you intended the bold faced names to represent winners and the remainder to represent nominees, there was no explanation alerting readers to this fact. I have reverted it to the way it was, since there was no confusion with that format. Thank you. MovieMadness (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Writers Guild of America Award

Hello again! I just added data to this article. Because you did such a terrific job cleaning up the Daytime Serials section, I didn't want to delete it, but do you agree it's a little confusing? I can't tell who won and who was a nominee. And I don't think it makes sense to include just two years, in two different formats, one detailed, the other just a list of titles. As I commented on the talk page, there was too much emphasis on soap operas in the original article; what's there now even seems to be more than necessary. Do you think the section should be removed entirely? I did delete the section devoted to As the World Turns nominations, because it seemed to have been added by a rabid fan of the show. It certainly wasn't pertinent to the article. Thanks for your feedback. MovieMadness (talk) 18:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello, and thanks for your response. Re: awards and nominations, the Wikipedia Film Project surprisingly has no guidelines re: their format. I adopted the one I used for Pieces of April for all articles I have created or extensively edited, and nobody has commented about the format, so I suspect it's not a major issue with most people who contribute to film articles. I've seen all the formats you've mentioned and found some confusing, others OK. I think if a first-time user of Wikipedia looks at the way I've listed them, there will be no question as to which were nominations and which were winners.
As far as the Writers Guild Awards, since you agree the separate section for Daytime Serials isn't necessary, I'm going to remove it. I didn't want to do so without getting your feedback since you worked so hard on it. Thanks again for writing! MovieMadness (talk) 13:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Bernard Hopkins.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Bernard Hopkins.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. Sdrtirs (talk) 18:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)