User talk:Archange50

Speedy deletion nomination of The call girl


A tag has been placed on The call girl, 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 that does not provide sufficient context to identify its subject. 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   to the article 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. Archange50 (talk) 00:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

December 2009
Your addition, The girl of the night, has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. 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 article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Evil saltine (talk) 01:08, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi. The problem is as outlined above, i.e., it was copyrighted material which can never be posted here.  You're certainly free to write about the movie in your own words.  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Harold Greenwald
All but one sentence of the deleted page is derived from the NYT article. You are free to re-create the article with text that is entirely your own work. Evil saltine (talk) 02:19, 9 December 2009 (UTC) To copy and paste intelligently is enough hard work to me. Altough I do not make money on that nor anyone does, it shall be allowed. I am not a stoïcian, I give it up to you...--Archange50 (talk) 02:26, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Harold Greenwald
A tag has been placed on Harold Greenwald 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 blatant 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.

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 Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see 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, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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.  ttonyb (talk) 03:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Harold Greenwald
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Harold Greenwald, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). As a copyright violation, Harold Greenwald appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Harold Greenwald has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at and send an email with the message to . See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Archange50 (talk) 03:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Anything derived from copyrighted text is not acceptable in Wikipedia (see Copyright FAQ). Evil saltine (talk) 04:17, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Exactly. I didn't have to read the article; all it took was a Google search of some of the text.  The article had already been tagged as a violation when I deleted it.  Neither you nor I could take Mickey Mouse, change his coloring and detail a bit, rename him "Michael Mouse" and expect to try and sell such a character without the Disney folks coming down like a ton of bricks.  Same thing applies here.  Since this is considered to be free documentation which anyone may use, no one may take someone else's text, post it here and call it free.  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:24, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


 * PS: Your earlier comment is true; no one here is making any money, but the Times is making money with their text.  I hope this settles the matter.  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:26, 9 December 2009 (UTC)