User talk:Feltshammer

Your recent addition has been removed, as it appears to have added 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. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Nyttend (talk) 04:15, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry to have frustrated you; Wikipedia has a don't-bite-the-new-editors policy, so I didn't mean to disturb you. You've definitely not been "blacklisted"; if I'd done anything to keep you from editing, you would have received a notice when you tried to edit a page, saying that you'd been blocked for a specific reason.  I removed the sections because they weren't referenced — unlike your new addition of the Patti Page exhibit — and as such didn't appear to be in the style or format that really belongs here at Wikipedia.  I've removed most of the Oz stuff for the same reason — whoever added it didn't give any reliable sources to prove what was written.  Please feel free to add referenced information in your own words, and please accept my apology for being too harsh.  Nyttend (talk) 14:58, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Forgot one thing — the notable natives and residents section is for natives and residents who appear to pass Wikipedia's notability standards; while they're not completely a bright-line rule, the notability guidelines aren't a subjective thing of "I think he's important" or "I don't"; it's defined along the lines of "This person has gotten significant attention in print or online". That's why I've restored Balderson, because as you can see from his article, much has been written about him.  Nyttend (talk) 15:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)