User talk:FavreisGod

CYLC article
Hi, welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for contributing. Since registering, you've made a number of edits to a single article (and no others), the Congressional Youth Leadership Council. The pattern of your edits seems to indicate an intimate knowledge of the company, like this edit and this edit.

You have also removed well-sourced information in what appears to be an unbalanced way, for example, you removed all negative information included in the brief mention of the Common Cause article here, leaving only praise. This is odd given the article was critical of CYLC.

You edited well-referenced remarks by Angie Peltzer in such a way as to completely change the tenor of her words, deleting the fact that she was present at the Inaugural Conference and that the company had extended the enrollment period "to capitalize on public interest" here.

You deleted the fact that the company has never made public a promised report by Civiletti, despite this being well-sourced.

This suggests to me a possible conflict of interest, in that you may be close to the organization, perhaps an alumni, ex- or current employee.


 * "COI editing is strongly discouraged. When editing causes disruption to the encyclopedia through violation of policies such as neutral point of view, what Wikipedia is not, and copyright compliance, accounts may be blocked. COI editing also risks causing public embarrassment outside of Wikipedia for the individuals and groups being promoted."

If you are close to, previously, or currently affiliated or employed by CYLC or Envision, "Editors with COIs are strongly encouraged to declare their interests, both on their user pages and on the talk page of any article they edit..."

"Where an editor does not disclose an existing affiliation or other conflict of interest, carefully following Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy may help counteract biased editing."

So please try to be a bit more balanced in your perspective. You may want to discuss proposed edits on the article's talk page first to get other's input. Please do not remove well-sourced information that contributes to the context of related information.

Regards, -- btphelps (talk) (contribs) 05:38, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Envision article
FavreisGod, you are making aggressive edits and deleting well-sourced facts in the Envision EMI, LLC article that IMO alter the neutral point of view of the article. If you do not desist and begin to discuss these edits on the article's talk page first, I am going to ask administrators to look into your edits and your possible conflict of interest. I will be reverting some of your edits later on when I have more time. -- btphelps (talk) (contribs) 20:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
Hi Sal. You have continued to make contributions here (and others) to Envision EMI, LLC without resolving whether there is a conflict of interest. This is essential if you will continue to contribute to articles about a company who may be a client of your employer, R&R Partners. If you do not respond to the request to clarify whether an apparent conflict of interest exists, I will bring your contributions to the attention of administrators. -- btphelps (talk) (contribs) 14:53, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * As discussed on the Envision talk page, I will work with btphelps to create a balanced article and I am looking forward to reaching an agreeable solution. -- FavreisGod (talk) 19:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:StacyKeibler2011.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:StacyKeibler2011.jpeg. 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 File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File 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. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 23:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Perfect! Thanks for the details here -- I will get the photographer to do one of the above steps so that we can get the more recent photo of Stacy up there (since the one on there now, frankly, is from more than a decade ago and Stacy is 31 now, not 21 -- ha). Thanks for the speedy reply and I'll get this info to you guys ASAP FavreisGod (talk) 14:00, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

UPDATE: Per the instructions above, I had Cliff fill out and sign & date the sample form and emailed a copy to permissions-en@wikimedia.org this morning, and copied Cliff on the email. Let me know if I need to do anything else! FavreisGod (talk) 16:17, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:GhostTunes.com screenshot.png
 Thanks for uploading File:GhostTunes.com screenshot.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:49, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:GhostTunes logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:GhostTunes logo.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:50, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:GhostTunes logo2.png
 Thanks for uploading File:GhostTunes logo2.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:50, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of GhostTunes


A tag has been placed on GhostTunes, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. C759 (talk) 02:47, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:GhostTunes.com screenshot.png
Thanks for uploading File:GhostTunes.com screenshot.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ron h jones (Talk) 18:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited R&R Partners, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Public affairs. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:16, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Images at Commons
Thank you for your recent work on articles related to Peter Lik.

I'm very surprised to see that the photo illustrating is at Wikimedia Commons, described by you as being in the public domain, and that you write there: "This is just a copy of the original photograph. Permission to use the imagery was granted by Peter Lik USA for purpose of creating this Wiki page." Where is Peter Lik USA announcing its release of material into the public domain?

Additionally, this isn't how copyright releases work. I mean, creation of a Wikipedia page may have been what Peter Lik USA primarily hopes/hoped for, but the PD template itself says "Peter Lik grants anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law." That means any copy of the work (not just a 460×306 pixel version), and of course for any purpose.

Anyway, the thing to do at Commons when uploading material such as this (which is normally presumed to be conventionally copyright, "all rights reserved") is (i) to provide a link to the page where the work is either released into the public domain or copyleft by Creative Commons, and (ii) to add the tag "". Then some Commons admin will check that everything's correct, and mark the file as having been okayed. -- Hoary (talk) 02:48, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Ways to improve Phantom (photograph)
Hi, I'm Ironholds. FavreisGod, thanks for creating Phantom (photograph)!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Thank you for writing this article! Please address the tags on it; let me know if you need any help.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Ironholds (talk) 00:48, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Eternal Moods


The article Eternal Moods has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Notability - our only source is about six words in an article."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nat Gertler (talk) 15:26, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Illusion (photograph)


The article Illusion (photograph) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "No visible import. The photograph gets just part of one sentence in the only source listed. Even that source doesn't claim that the photograph sold for millions of dollars, only reports that the photographer's website claimed it sold for that much, and that website is not a reliable source for such information."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nat Gertler (talk) 01:21, 16 December 2018 (UTC)