User talk:James Scott Francis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] AfD nomination of Royal society of human rights investigators
Royal society of human rights investigators, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Royal society of human rights investigators satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal society of human rights investigators and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Royal society of human rights investigators during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Chris 19:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Royal Society of Human Rights Investigators
Can you produce any evidence of such an organisation being granted a Royal Charter? A scan of the letters patent would suffice. Dbromage 06:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Motif.colour.JPG
Thank you for uploading Image:Motif.colour.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 14:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:JSF COA.gif
Thank you for uploading Image:JSF COA.gif. 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 14:45, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Talk:Royal society of human rights investigators
Please stop cutting and pasting copyrighted material into Wikipedia, as you did with sections of [1] and [2]. Wikipedia takes copyright issues very seriously; such material is deleted summarily and consistent offenders blocked from posting.
In any event, your use of this page is inappropriate: Wikipedia is not a newswire, a blog, a soapbox, a publisher of original thought or a free webhost. An article's talkpage is for discussing improvements to the article itself and material which does not serve this purpose is likely to be deleted. If you think the material merits inclusion in Wikipedia you should add a neutral summary (not a cut-and-paste) of it to a relevant article instead. Iain99 21:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed material with obvious blatant copyright violations from the talk page. Per Iain99, Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Dbromage [Talk]
00:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Please do not post copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Talk:Royal society of human rights investigators. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Dbromage [Talk] 09:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Speedy deletion for Royal society of human rights investigators
A tag has been placed on Royal society of human rights investigators, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{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, 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. Dbromage [Talk] 00:57, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Royal society of human rights investigators, you will be blocked from editing. Dbromage [Talk] 11:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did to Talk:Royal society of human rights investigators, you will be blocked from editing. Dbromage [Talk] 11:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Iain99 15:01, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Royal society of human rights investigators. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —DerHexer (Talk) 15:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Royal society of human rights investigators, you will be blocked from editing. —DerHexer (Talk) 15:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
