User talk:HayleyMoses

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Cefltd, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your addition to Kurt Allen has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Copyrights. You may also want to review Copy-paste.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. McGeddon (talk) 09:08, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Your message
Hi. I have left you a message at User talk:Boing! said Zebedee. In short, you appear to be trying to use Wikipedia for self-promotion, and that is very much frowned upon - so please take note of what I've explained to you there. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:57, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kurt Allen (The Last Bardjohn of Calypso)


A tag has been placed on Kurt Allen (The Last Bardjohn of Calypso), requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It 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. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, 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. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "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. red dogsix (talk) 21:49, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeatedly creating a self-promotion article written in unacceptably promotional language, with no indication of notability or supporting sources, and containing material not properly released under a suitable copyright licence - despite having it deleted several times and being told not to recreate it in the same form. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:09, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

My Humble Appeal

 * Posting an unblock request that contains unambiguous promotion and that essentially admits that this is a role account (we do not permit shared accounts for copyright licensing reasons) is not helping your case what-so-ever. — Jeremy  v^_^v  Bori! 22:39, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

You don't appear to have understood anything I tried to explain to you on my Talk page when you queried my first deletion of the article, so I will repeat it here (slightly modified)...
 * "As it stood, the article was a copyright infringement, even if the material used does belong to you. Please have a read of Donating copyrighted materials to find out how to release material in a suitable form for re-use by Wikipedia (and, by extension, by anyone else for any purpose). Having said that, the style of the writing was totally unsuitable for an encyclopedia anyway, and it had no independent sources (see WP:RS) indicating notability according to Wikipedia's standards (see WP:N). So even if we had no copyright concerns, the article would still almost certainly be deleted because a) it did not demonstrate sufficient notability and b) it was written in a promotional/marketing style (and with a promotional style title too). Finally, as the article was about yourself a subject with which you appear to have some sort of organizational connection, you should probably not be the person to write it anyway - please see our Conflict of Interest guidelines. So, please do not recreate the article until these problems have been addressed - when you think they have been, I suggest you create a draft and submit it via the Articles for Creation process, where it will be reviewed for suitability."

I strongly suggest you read that again, follow the links it contains (the words in blue), and read and understand those policies before making another unblock request. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:05, 27 December 2015 (UTC) Oh, one last thing, you say: "we believe that wikipedia assists humanitarians and social activist to further communicate the message of peace, love and social consciousness". That is not correct - Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and nothing more. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:10, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

a genuine error
I understand. I just thought i would create my username to reflect my email address. I did not realize it would create a conflict in creating my page.

@Boing! said Zebedee.

WOW. I now completely understand.... I now see where I went wrong. Please accept my most sincere apologies. I honestly did not understand what the real issue was and i assure you i did not intentionally keep attempting to go against the guidelines/ rules of Wikipedia.

I now understand FULLY and will DESIST from repeating this from now, and in the future.

thank you for being so patient.

THANK YOU
@Boing! said Zebedee. WOW. I now completely understand.... I now see where I went wrong. Please accept my most sincere apologies. I honestly did not understand what the real issue was and i assure you i did not intentionally keep attempting to go against the guidelines/ rules of Wikipedia. I now understand FULLY and will DESIST from repeating this from now, and in the future. thank you for being so patient.