User talk:DavidPickett/Archive 1

Butterfield Elementary School
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Butterfield Elementary School, and it appears to include a substantial copy of. 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.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 06:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Copyright waiver for Butterfield Elementary School
Hello – I have removed the WP:CSD tag from the above article, since you have asserted permission on the article's talk page. That step helps, but unless formal permission is received the article likely will be deleted anyway.

Please take one of these steps, which you can also find at Copyright problems:


 * Post a statement at the original website(s) that you permit reuse of its content under the GFDL (note that this allows anyone, not just Wikipedia, to reuse the content), or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original website to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org.

By doing this, you and your organization agree that your text (or picture) can be used freely by Wikipedia AND its downstream users, and that such use might include commercial use, for which you are not entitled to royalties or compensation. As stated below the edit box, if you do not want your text to be edited mercilessly you should not submit it.

You should also format the article according to the Manual of Style; it is unusual for an article on an elementary school to have the level of detail you've given. The formats of other elementary school articles may be helpful to you, and you can find some at Category:Elementary schools in California. You should also add the article to this category or one of its subcategories.

Please let me know if you have questions or need assistance. Welcome to Wikipedia! – Krakatoa  Katie  22:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe the GFDL release on the school's website takes care of everything. I'll clean things up at my end.  Thanks for your contribution! --  But | seriously | folks   21:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Richmond University (London)
Hello again – thanks for the message.

Let me give you a couple of hints before I address your question. First, when linking to another Wikipedia article, just enclose the title in two brackets. For example, User:KrakatoaKatie gives User:KrakatoaKatie. When linking to some special Wikipedia pages, such as an editor's contributions, an article's history or a particular editing diff, you have to use the full URL, and you'll learn that as you go along.

Second, there's a 'show preview' button underneath the edit box which does just what it says: it shows a preview of the edit you're about to make. You need to use it before you push the 'save page' button. Saving a page over and over again in quick succession clogs up the page history and makes it harder for the recent changes patrollers to find and revert vandalism.

I think the Tutorial might be just the thing you need – it's not terribly long and it's _very_ helpful for new editors. I used it when I started yon these 11,000 edits ago. Personally, I think all new editors should use it, but that's not likely to happen. ;-)

Anyway, regarding the above-mentioned article... the particular diff I mentioned above shows who placed the disputed tag. He/she (I'll use 'he' for simplicity) has not registered for an account, so he's known by his IP address. I agree with you about the lack of any dispute – I don't see anything out of the ordinary that could/should be disputed, but I haven't crawled through the article's history.

You've done the right thing by asking about it on the article's talk page. If I were you, I would be bold, remove the tag now, and watchlist the page to see if anyone replaces it. Sometimes that's a better idea than waiting on a talk page response.

Anyone can add or remove this kind of template, hopefully with consensus support. You'll find the disputed tag and its dozens of cousins, nephews, and stepchildren at the template messages page. Most people never realize the huge structure that holds Wikipedia together, and this is the tip of the iceberg. I was here for two or three months before I realized there were admins and that I could (eventually) be one.

I'm glad you've decided to stay a while, dip your toe in the water, and edit more pages. Sorry about the copyright melee, but free content is a big thing with us. It's nice to see you've emerged whole on the other side. :-) Let me know if you have more questions or need any help. Thanks! - Krakatoa  Katie  01:15, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:BESLogo.jpg
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:BESLogo.jpg. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 16:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


 * It's REALLY without source!--OsamaK 18:25, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:LEUSDlogo.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:LEUSDlogo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 01:37, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:American Baptist Churches USA logo.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:American Baptist Churches USA logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Otto Newman
Please note another editor nominated this article for speedy deletion. I removed the tag as notability was asserted through publication history but the other editor may still nominate the article for AFD.Exxolon (talk) 21:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

userbox relocation
Hi, just a heads-up that a userbox you have on your pages (media is brainwashing tool) has changed location to User:Sappho%27d/Userboxes/MainMediaBS

Cheers. Drywontonmee (talk) 09:34, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Greetings from the EMS Taskforce

 * I have seen you have taken interest in EMS related articles and we currently will be doing a GA/article improvement on Emergency medical service it will be our first project as a task force and would love your input and editing, Cheers! Medicellis (talk) 02:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Catawal
A tag has been placed on Catawal requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. 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.

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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Passportguy (talk) 15:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

ABCUSA
Hey. I'm the user who removed the section. If you think that there is valuable information in the statement that can be used in the article that's great, however, I fail to see why Wikipedia should devote a whole section to present verbatim an organization's mission statement which can be found on the official website which is linked in the external links. Wouldn't it be better if this were incorporated into the article? Ltwin (talk) 04:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Norvall Jerome Pickett
A tag has been placed on Norvall Jerome Pickett requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Bdb484 (talk) 02:29, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Norvall Jerome Pickett
I have nominated Norvall Jerome Pickett, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Norvall Jerome Pickett. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Bdb484 (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Possible COI
Hi there. I saw that you had reverted my changes at Norvall Jerome Pickett, so I wanted to make sure you understood that references are intended to provide readers without outside verification that claims made in an article are actually true, not to provide external links to every organization mentioned in an article. The bulk of the links in this article did not actually do anything to verify any information found in the article.

I also realized that there may be a conflict of interest for you in editing this page, as you appear to have a close connection to the subject of the article. As a long-time Wikipedian, you may already be aware that editors are discouraged from editing when such conflicts exist. I have therefore requested input from other editors at the conflict of interest noticeboard. Your input there would be appreciated. — Bdb484 (talk) 04:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)