User talk:Donsherio

re: your use page
Cute. Herostratus 04:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity,
A tag has been placed on GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.  Anna Lincoln  10:04, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity
A tag has been placed on GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Favonian (talk) 10:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problem: GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity, 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.gblur.ca/about.php, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

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 allowance license, then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity, in your email. See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity 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 Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity. See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

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 [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity 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! — Cactus Writer |   needles  12:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

advice
Let me remind you if permission is granted, the article will almost certainly be deleted if not rewritten --it is totally promotional and non-encyclopedic, and gives no evidence of notability. You need to show notability with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases  You also need to write like an encyclopedia article, not a press release--don't praise yourself, say what you do. . For further information see our FAQ about business, organisations, and articles like this. I advise you to improve this article  quickly, before the article gets deleted by a regular deletion process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs) 17:15, 6 November 2009

Your question
Hello. In response to your question at Talk:GBLUR Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity, copyright problems will be addressed if the individual who contacted the Wikimedia Foundation responds to his e-mail with a proper licensing release. It is not uncommon that several rounds of e-mail are required, as the language that we need is fairly specific. DGG has given you some solid advice just above, but I'll expand it a bit with links to various policies and guidelines that you may find helpful.

The main things to consider in the article are notability, verifiability and neutrality.

With respect to notability, this particular article is governed by the notability guidelines on groups. The rule of thumb here is noting whether the group has received significant or widespread coverage in secondary sources that are reliable and independent of the group (excluding press releases and information solely available on the company website&mdash;these sources may be used for additional information after notability has been established by secondary sources). (See WP:RS)

Our verifiability policy(Verifiability) requires that all information must be attributable to reputable publications. If it hasn't been published by a reputable source, we can't use it, even if we personally know it to be true. Unpublished information is one element of "original research" on Wikipedia—an umbrella term that also includes arguments, speculation, and ideas. Such material is forbidden by policy, which you can read at No original research.

Neutrality may be a particular challenge given your connection to the subject, which may constitute a "conflict of interest". Our conflict of interest guideline offers some suggestions for how to proceed in such cases. You'll want to be particularly careful to remain neutral and avoid promotion. Essentially, if material seems positive or promotional, you should not include it unless it is cited to a source that is not connected to the group, and even then you should consider it carefully. Even if others are saying positive things about a subject, we have to be sure that our coverage provides a balanced view of all commentary to avoid "undue weight" on one aspect.

Help:Starting a new page should give you all the guidance you need, but you might also look at Your first article and How to write a great article. You can also take a tour through the Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article.

If you have any questions, please let me know. I'll be watching your page for a time, and you're also welcome to come by my talk page. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:36, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Update regarding copyright concern
Since we do not yet have verification of permission by the processes set out above and sufficient time has passed since the placement of the notice, the article has been deleted for copyright concerns. This deletion is not necessarily permanent. If you have already sent a letter to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) and GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) (if you are not the copyright holder or have co-authored the material, release under CC-BY-SA-compatible license alone is sufficient), the article will be restored when that letter is received and processed by the Wikimedia Communications committee. Likewise, if you have not yet sent a letter, you still may (or resend it, if you believe your original may have been lost), and the article will be restored when that letter is received and processed.

As Wikipedia does not require proof of identity on account creation, it is essential that we receive external proof of authorization in order to ensure that we remain compliant with US Copyright law. It is also essential that we verify that copyright holders understand the extent of the release they are authorizing, in that our licenses permit modification and reuse in any forum, even commercial publication, as long as authorship credit is maintained and future copies are compatibly licensed.

Please note that once permission is verified, the material may be evaluated and altered to meet Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Although we appreciate donations, we cannot guarantee that material donated will be retained.

Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:08, 22 November 2009 (UTC)