User talk:Glhann17

Duplicate images uploaded
Thanks for uploading Image:Fairfield Sept2007.JPG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Fairfield Oct2007.JPG. The copy called Image:Fairfield Oct2007.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 22:59, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Fairfield Vermont June 2008.JPG
Thank you for uploading File:Fairfield Vermont June 2008.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sherool (talk) 23:29, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Fairfield Vermont Nov 2005.JPG
Thank you for uploading File:Fairfield Vermont Nov 2005.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sherool (talk) 23:29, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Your images of Fairfield
Thanks for placing free licenses on these pictures! So often, people upload good images without licenses and never return to license them properly, so they end up being deleted. I may soon be moving these pictures to the Wikimedia Commons, so that other Wikipedias can use them as well. If I do, it might seem like the files are deleted, but they'll be equally easy to use. Nyttend (talk) 01:02, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've now moved the images to the Commons. I've uploaded them there with more explanatory names, so the names under which you uploaded them are no longer useful; however, you can find them at File:Fields in Fairfield, Vermont.jpg and File:Stream in Fairfield, Vermont.jpg.  You required that you be attributed as the author, and I've made sure to follow that requirement.  Nyttend (talk) 01:26, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Diffuse reflectance infrared fourier transform


The article Diffuse reflectance infrared fourier transform has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * no evidence

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. &mdash; RHaworth 21:16, 16 September 2011 (UTC)