User talk:Docued

License tagging for Image:John Marshall.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:John Marshall.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 23:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Tim Asch.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Tim Asch.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. 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 Fair use, 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 you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 11:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

page deleted
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your, but 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.

Feel free to re-submit a new version of the article. 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 include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I irrevocably release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later, for use on Wikipedia and elsewhere."

You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here. You can also leave a message on my talk page. Chick Bowen 17:49, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

edits to Jay Ruby and John Marshall (filmmaker)
You cannot just paste text from other sites into these articles. My understanding is that you may be able to do this if you hold the copyright, but generally speaking, article text drawing on this information should be summarized and properly cited. --Media anthro 23:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Dead Birds (1965 film) and Robert Gardner
Please do not post copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. See Copyrights. Copyright violations are unacceptable and persistent violators will be blocked. Your original contributions are welcome. --Media anthro 16:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * In response to your email: I am deleting the content you keep adding because it violates Wikipedia policy. Additionally, the content you keep adding is not written in a tone suitable for a Wikipedia article and informs the reader of nothing that they couldn't learn by clicking on the link to the DER page from which the text is taken.
 * I would respectfully suggest that you take the time to familiarize yourself with the policies and etiquette of editing here.--Media anthro 18:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I have requested administrator attention to the above.--Media anthro 18:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

In response to your second email
I'm not an admin here, so it's entirely possible that I'm interpreting Wikipedia policy incorrectly with regard to whether you can use the material. It could be that since DER holds the copyright, your say-so is enough to put in the article. If this is the case, someone more experienced in the community than I will tell me to back off.

HOWEVER, regardless of whether you have the legal right to insert this text, we generally don't just copy and paste text from other sites. For starters: what's the point? We already have links in each Wikipedia article to each of the DER pages from which the text came. Secondly, inserting the text as a whole presents issues in terms of grammar, style, pronoun usage and so on. One example of this, from your version of the Dead Birds article:
 * Dead Birds is a film about the Dani, a people dwelling in the Grand Valley of the Baliem high in the mountains of West Irian. When I shot the film in 1961, the Dani had an almost classic Neolithic culture.

The use of the first person is generally inappropriate for an encyclopedia article, and is jarring to the reader, who realizes that this content was simply slotted in. It's usually best to summarize or paraphrase such sources to produce original text for the Wikipedia article. Bibliographies, filmographies and sources, however, are great! You might want to read up on linking though, as there's a whole etiquette surrounding that.--Media anthro 18:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

PS: You may wish to use your talk page instead of email to converse. Just hit the "Edit this page" tab up top or this link and place your text below mine at the bottom of the page.--Media anthro 18:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

We have added the GNU copyright tag to the bottom of one our pages, and if it is sufficient, then we will add it to all others that will be used for Wikipedia pages. The link, just to show this, is: http://www.der.org/films/filmmakers/john-marshall.html

This should not only show that we are willing to comply with the Wikipedia copyright policy, but that we are also directly affiliated with DER, ending all speculation about the validity of our username and intentions. There should be no further issues regarding copyright once our GNU tag is posted on the appropriate DER pages, so I expect it will be much easier to create and edit the pages we have been working on since joining. Docued 19:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There is, however, the additional concern that the text you are posting is unsuitable for Wikipedia articles (as both User:Jkelly and I have noted) and will be removed or changed substantially.--Media anthro 19:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I am unsure what you mean by "unsuitable" text...like mentioned before, our intention is not for the promotion of our company, it is to provide information regarding filmmakers and their films, and make that information clear and accessible... plain and simple. If that is misrepresented in the biography content we currently have posted, then I am willing to edit the content, however I am unsure what needs to be done. Can you give me a specific example of where the text may be "unsuitable", because I clearly have not viewed any of our text as so. Thank you.
 * Although you may (or may not) have addressed the copyright issue, this is also a concern: The text already exists online. As I explained above, at best, it is redundant to create a Wikipedia article that cites verbatim a webpage that is one click away. At worst, it becomes a promotional vehicle for DER (who, by the way, I have nothing against, as you suggested). Wikipedia is not a mirror).
 * The text you have pasted is often unencyclopedic in tone. For instance, some of it consists of long, first-person quotes about the subject in question.
 * If you review WP:NOT, you may get a better sense of what Wikipedia should include.--Media anthro 20:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I have reverted your edits to Jay Ruby. The unsuitability of copy-and-pasted text aside, this text was taken from Ruby's personal site on temple.edu and does not belong to you.
 * You're going to find your experience here much more rewarding if you take some time to learn to edit in harmony with the community.--Media anthro 21:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Copyrighted content, username
There are two issues with your use of this site. The first is your insertion of text that has been copied from somewhere else. All contributions to Wikipedia must be licensed under the GFDL. Contributions must also meet our content policies, and be encyclopedic in tone. Your contributions, which, by the way, should be not be signed, have unclear licensing status and strike a promotional tone.

Of further concern is your claim to be affiliated with, and especially to be acting as an agent of, an organisation, and that your editing is apparantly predicated upon that connection. See Conflict of interest for more information, but, in brief, we are not enthusiastic about such a use of Wikipedia in general, and are deeply uncomfortable with what amounts to an anonymous user account identifying itself as asserting a professional relationship to the subjects of our articles. We neither want to, nor or able to, confirm such a relationship, and so request that usernames do not assert such a relationship. If you are genuinely interested in contributing to giving away a free, reusable encyclopedia, see Changing username for how to proceed. If, however, your purpose here is to promote affiliates of yours, you are likely to find your experience here frustrating. Jkelly 19:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

recent contributions
Hi, please note that I have again raised the issue of the cut-and-paste edits that you have recently made.

Another possible concern is that the subjects of the articles that you have created are non-notable, by Wikipeida standards, which means that they will be eventually deleted. I listed P.Kerim Friedman for deletion, and it was deleted eight minutes later.--Media anthro 12:36, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Blocked
I have blocked you for 48 hours for repeatedly copy-pasting your website text into articles and for inserting in some cases tens of external links to your own site into various articles. Several of yoru articles seem to serve no apparent purpose other than to promote your company. This is what we call spamming, and we don't like it one little bit. Please see the external link guidelines, specifically links to avoid. Guy (Help!) 12:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not for promotion of the films and filmmakers that your company has a part in. Using Wikipedia for advertising or promotion is not acceptable.  &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 12:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Just as some useful context, Documentary Educational Resources is one of the foremost distributors of anthropological and ethnographic films. As such, it is a nonprofit academic and educational organization that this editor is so assiduously promoting, not a commercial enterprise (not that this makes it any more acceptable, but I am inclined to believe that Docued means well). The DER site itself is a great resource for anyone interested in these films, so my feeling is that one link per article would be useful (such as a link to a page on the Ax Fight in the article about The Ax Fight). I guess my point here is to make sure Docued understands that no one bears any grudge against DER as he/she suggested in earlier posts, but rather that contributions should be neutral and non-promotional. --Media anthro 13:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Conflict of interest applies in this case. As to the notabilty of DER, if there are appropriate secondary sources to validate the company's notability, it might be a more appropriate to create an article on the company rather than its filmmakers.  &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 13:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Jkelly suggested above that Docued consider a name change to avoid appearances of conflicts of interest. My feeling is that DER would easily pass the test of notability and would be a useful addition to the visual anthropology category. If any editor appropriately contributes material to such an article, I'd be happy to dig up those sources (10 seconds of Googling produces this, which might roughly satisfy the notability requirement; there are also, however, decades of articles from anthro journals referencing DER).--Media anthro 14:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Changing the editor's name does not remove the conflict of interest, it only (I view) inappropriately hides it &mdash; coming incredibly close to sockpuppetry to avoid scrutiny. Per WP:AUTO: "You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest." An editor who does not have a vested interest in DER could appropriately contribute an article on the organization. &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 15:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Guys, I suspect we're wasting our time here. DocuEd has percisely zero contributions in Talk space and only two comments in User talk, both on this page.  I am far from confident that this user has any aim other than promoting their company. 62.73.137.190 14:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Catarina Alves Costa
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your, but 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.

Feel free to re-submit a new version of the article. 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 include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later."

You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here. You can also leave a message on my talk page. Ccscott 14:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

!Nai, the Story of a !Kung Woman
I noticed that you blanked !Nai, the Story of a !Kung Woman. In the future I would suggest you make sure the title of an article you create is correct and also realize that simply blanking a page does not delete the page. If it happens again place after you have blanked the page. though I would suggest you not do it at all. I have tagged it so. Also check out wikipedia's manual of style.--Tainter 16:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Copyright issue with Aditi Nath Sarkar}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 17:53, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Copyright issue with Five Species}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 17:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from pasting copyrighted material into Wikipedia
Please do not post copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. See Copyrights. Copyright violations are unacceptable and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Your original contributions are welcome. . I notice you have been warned about this previously.

Also, it appears you may have a conflict of interest. Editors are strongly discouraged from editing articles about subjects in which they have a direct interest.

Butseriouslyfolks 17:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I will add a proper citation for the information from the Documentary Educational Resources site, as I am responsible for creating that particular page as well. We are the copyright holders for the biography on both sites, and they are just replicated on both pages. After I correctly include citations, I expect no more deletions of the page. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Docued (talk • contribs)


 * In the future, please follow the permission confirmation procedure outlined at Requesting_copyright_permission before introducing any copyrighted text to Wikipedia, or you may be blocked without any further warning. I have deleted Five Species anyway as an advertisement and because it did not assert any notability. Wikipedia does not allow advertising. If you create any other articles related to your company's products they may be deleted and you may be blocked without any further warning. Sandstein 18:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Copyright issue with Aditi Nath Sarkar}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 18:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for. Docued

Copyright issue with Ákos Östör}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 18:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for. Docued

Copyright issue with Lina Fruzzetti}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 18:28, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for. Docued

Copyright issue with Singing Pictures}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 18:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for. Docued

Copyright issue with Magical Death}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 18:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for. Docued

Copyright issue with Duka's Dilemma}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 18:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for. Docued

Copyright issue with African Dance: Sand, Drum, and Shostakovich}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 18:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for. Docued

Copyright issue with The Disappearing of Tuvalu: Trouble In Paradise}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 18:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for. Docued

Copyright issue with Whose Is This Song?}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 18:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for. Docued

Copyright issue with Adela Peeva}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 21:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for.

Copyright issue with Sin Embargo: Never the Less}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 21:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for.

Copyright issue with Marathon Monks of Mt. Hiei}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 21:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for.

Copyright issue with Trading Women}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 22:04, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for.

Copyright issue with Altar of Fire}}}
Hello. Concerning your contribution, :, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from. As a copyright violation, : appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. : has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. For text material, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source, provided that it is credible.

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 GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:. If the article or image has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at :, after describing the release on the talk page. However, for text content, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Butseriouslyfolks 22:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm continuously confused by the policy regarding information on the pages I have created, and had deleted. I have properly cited the information to us here at Documentary Educational Resources, as we are the copyright owners of everything I have submitted thus far. I'm confused as to how the content I post can be classified as a copyright violation, if it is US who own the rights. Additionally, the intentions I have when posting this material is simply to make available information on some of the most innovative, successful documentary filmmakers and their films. That's it. This has been an issue for a few months now, and I'm asking now for you to give me a concrete example of what needs to be corrected, and in what manner. I appreciate your help, and hope you can give the answers I am looking for.

AfD nomination of Anne Zeller
An editor has nominated Anne Zeller, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 13:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:KungSanResettlement.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:KungSanResettlement.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 00:48, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:!Nai.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:!Nai.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 20:11, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:BalineseTranceSeance.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:BalineseTranceSeance.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 04:31, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Blunden Harbour
An article that you have been involved in editing, Blunden Harbour, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Blunden Harbour. Thank you. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 01:48, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Herb Di Gioia
Please do not add 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. I see from the above similar notes that you are associated in some way with DER films, where this information is also housed. If that were the source of the information, you might assert copyright permission through Wikipedia's procedures. However, in this case, this seems to be taken verbatim from the abstract at VAR. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. --Moonriddengirl 15:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Yanomamo Series.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Yanomamo Series.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 03:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:AfricanDance.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:AfricanDance.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Nv8200p talk 20:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:DeepHearts.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:DeepHearts.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 19:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:DukasDilemma.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:DukasDilemma.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Nv8200p talk 02:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Celebration.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Celebration.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 15:44, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Copyright problem: John Marshall (filmmaker)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as John Marshall (filmmaker), but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.newenglandfilm.com/news/archives/05june/marshall.htm, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article 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:John Marshall (filmmaker) and send an email with confirmation of permission 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:John Marshall (filmmaker) 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:John Marshall (filmmaker).

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:John Marshall (filmmaker)/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:John Marshall (filmmaker) saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Moondyne 15:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:ManCalledBee.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:ManCalledBee.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Nv8200p talk 00:09, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Bride Service (film)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Bride Service (film), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Bride Service (film). Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Schuy m 1 ( talk ) 13:38, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

File:SinEmbargo.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:SinEmbargo.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Skier Dude ( talk ) 00:27, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:ScreeningRoomSeries.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:ScreeningRoomSeries.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 09:15, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

File:TheFeast.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:TheFeast.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted.  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 00:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Nuer.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Nuer.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  F ASTILY  (T ALK ) 00:31, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:DodothMorning.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:DodothMorning.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 21:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:AfghanSeries.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:AfghanSeries.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 21:44, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:RandyOlson.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:RandyOlson.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 21:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Tim Asch.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Tim Asch.jpg. I noticed that 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, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 21:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:YanomamoMultiStudy.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:YanomamoMultiStudy.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:06, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Dancesofthekwakiutl.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Dancesofthekwakiutl.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:07, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:SingingPictures.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:SingingPictures.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:07, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:MagicalDeath.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:MagicalDeath.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:07, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Tuvalu.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Tuvalu.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:WhoseIsThisSong.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:WhoseIsThisSong.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:WhoseSong.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:WhoseSong.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:HominidEvolutionII.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:HominidEvolutionII.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:TradingWomen.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:TradingWomen.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:AltarOfFire.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:AltarOfFire.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:AnneZeller.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:AnneZeller.jpg. I noticed that 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, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:09, 28 September 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:09, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:RiversOfSand.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:RiversOfSand.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:09, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Dead-Birds.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Dead-Birds.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:BlundenHarbor.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:BlundenHarbor.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:ForestOfBliss.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:ForestOfBliss.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:JeanRouch.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:JeanRouch.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:OakParkStories.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:OakParkStories.jpg. I noticed that 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, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:11, 28 September 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:11, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File source problem with File:JKM.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:JKM.jpg. I noticed that 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, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:11, 28 September 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:11, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:RobertGardner.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:RobertGardner.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

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, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. 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 provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk  02:11, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

File:OakParkStories.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:OakParkStories.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:37, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

File:AnneZeller.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:AnneZeller.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

File:JKM.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:JKM.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)