User talk:Coachuk

Copyright problems
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Grow model, 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, Grow model appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Grow model 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 GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Grow model and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Grow model with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Grow model.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you. deranged bulbasaur 19:06, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of GROW model
A tag has been placed on GROW model, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as the Business' FAQ for more information.

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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:00, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Bob, the problem is that there is no evidence presented that this subject is at all notable. Links to guys who use it in their work is not evidence of notability, and indeed is a violation of our rules on external links and spamming. Has this topic been written up in reputable magazines dealing with the field? Has it been examined by peer-reviewed scientific journals? Notability is not an option; neither is verifiability, from impartial, reliable third-party sources. -- Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  13:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Maybe that's part of the problem: most of what's being done in the name of this subject is untested and ad hoc; if we don't have some sort of verifiable sources, it's hard to make a case for writing it up in an encyclopedia. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:28, 28 September 2008 (UTC)