User talk:Bonton rocki

Welcome!

Hello, Bonton rocki, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Honey Island Swamp Band, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: 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 have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Gaijin42 (talk) 04:53, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Honey Island Swamp Band


A tag has been placed on Honey Island Swamp Band, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia for multiple reasons. Please see the page to see the reasons. If the page has since been deleted, you can ask me the reasons by leaving a message on my user talk page.

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". 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 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Gaijin42 (talk) 04:53, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I saw your comments on the article's talk page, but even if the information originally came from the band's home page, that still makes it a copyright violation, because, as far as I can tell, the band's home page is also copyrighted (at least, there is nothing on it that explicitly says that it's not); thus, I had to delete it. Note that while it would be possible for whoever owns the rights to the text on the band's website to donate it to Wikipedia (i.e., to make it CC-BY-SA compatible), it still shouldn't be directly copied into Wikipedia.  In general, Wikipedia articles should be summaries of what reliable sources say about subjects, not just copies of what the subject has self-published.  If the band is notable (and it looks like they may be, if you can verify the claims about them receiving wide airplay), then the correct thing to do would be to start from scratch, using information from independent, reliable sources to describe them.  You can still use the info from their site for bio background, but it should be re-written in new words (for instance, it would need to be a lot less promotional and a lot more factual).  If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me on my talk page at any time. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:09, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

This content is not copyrighted. You logic that non-copyrighted content needs to explicitey state that it is not copyrighted is an illogical statement. I am the author of the content. You are basically saying that if i want to use this content I have to explicitly say this content is not copyrighted on the bands website and I need to delete it from the bands website so that i am not violating the copyright of non copyrighted material. How does that make any sense? I am stating here that content is not copyrighted. This is evident by the bio content being freely used by mulitple websites using all or part of the content for reviews of thier cds and for promotion of apperances. If the author of a piece of writting does not explicitly state that the material is copyrighted and lets multiple other publishers use the content in part or whole with no requirement to state that the content is not copyrighted this demonstrates that the material is not copyrighted. It also demonstrates that the author of the content is not vigorously defending the content as copyrighted. Therefore forfiting the right to call it copyrighted. It is also illogical that I will need to remove this content from their offical website to use it on this wiki page. This conent is not promotional. It is biographal in nature. I have seen no requirements that the content for wikipedia must be completely different from any other content in the world.

I request that this page be re-instated. Your removeal of this content is illogical. Again, this is not copyrighted material. That is why it can be freely used without permission. /BonTon Rocki — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.185.50.125 (talk) 08:14, 11 November 2011 (UTC)