User talk:Heather Chait

WP:A/R/C
The issue of the sidebar on Cultural Judaism is not at all an issue for arbitration, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. I'd suggest you remove the case, and if you think the navigation sidebar should not be there, you could simply remove it as well. If a dispute emerges, you could discuss it on the talk page of the article. If that does not resolve the dispute, please follow the remaining steps in Dispute resolution. Let me know if you have any questions on this. – xeno talk 17:34, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom (edit-conflicted with xeno above)
Hi Heather! I think your ArbCom case here is not well considered. ArbCom is the last step of the dispute resolution process, not the first. I am certain that ArbCom will not accept this case now. There are many other steps you can take first - e.g. delete the side bar yourself (it's created by the template, but please read WP:BRD), discuss it on talk: Cultural Judaism, or initiate an WP:RfC.

I also think you are a bit hasty in condemning this sidebar. It is a standard template added to (nearly) all articles related to topics in Judaism. It also was in the article from the very first revision in the history, in 2006, so it has not been added recently by any means. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 17:43, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Problems with upload of File:Sci logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Sci logo.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 15:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Sci logo.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Sci logo.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 created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:55, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Sci logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sci logo.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Hammersoft (talk) 17:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Snowysusan (talk) 08:17, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! OohBunnies!   (talk)  07:25, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Heather, thanks for your message. This time around the decline was not due to the reliability of the sources, but rather the notability of the foundation. See the guidelines on establishing notability for more information about this.
 * Sources here can perform two roles. One is to verify the information in an article, and the other is to prove that the subject of the article is "noteworthy" enough for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Unfortunately, your sources didn't really fulfil this latter role. What we need to see is reasonably in-depth coverage from an unaffiliated source, to prove that the foundation is a notable subject. See the golden rule. Obviously, primary sources aren't sufficient for this purpose as they are usually written by/for the subject.
 * If you can find any sources that might help prove the notability of the topic, feel free to add them and resubmit the article. We're generally looking for things like magazine or newspaper articles, and they can be online or printed. They must be reliable sources though, things like other Wikipedia articles, Youtube videos, Facebook pages etc. will not suffice.
 * I hope this clears things up a bit for you. Good luck, and if you any further questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. OohBunnies!   (talk)  06:10, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia&.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the [ reviewer's talk page] . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 01:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
SarahStierch (talk) 02:46, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Posen Foundation concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Posen Foundation, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 17:24, 20 August 2013 (UTC)