User talk:Highpeak100

Welcome!
Hello, Highpeak100, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Rodrigo tavares, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! red dogsix (talk) 15:32, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Proposed deletion of Rodrigo tavares


The article Rodrigo tavares has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. red dogsix (talk) 15:32, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Rodrigo tavares


A tag has been placed on Rodrigo tavares requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://granitopartners.com/about/team/executive-team/rodrigo-tavares/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. red dogsix (talk) 15:36, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Strange statements
I am quite bewildered by the statements you made at Talk:Rodrigo Tavares, such as that there is "no resemblence [sic]" to the page that you copied from. There were numerous sentences that were word for word identical, and many more which used much of the same wording but with a few changes, and groups of sentences using the same wording but moved into different positions in the page. A surprisingly large number of people imagine that such minor modifications while still retaining enough of the original to make the connection perfectly obvious is enough to avoid breaking copyright law. For that reason I am quite used to editors protesting that they did not infringe copyright when they clearly did, but to claim that there was "no resemblance", is, frankly, absurd. You must have known full well that there was considerable resemblance, whether or not you believed that the resemblance was not enough to constitute copyright infringement. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:54, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017
Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:57, 8 July 2017 (UTC)


 * 1) If you have an external connection to the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. Editors with such a connection may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline indicates that an editor in such a situation should avoid editing or creating articles on the subject where they have a conflict of interest, and if they believe they have changes which should be made to such articles then they should instead propose changes on the Talk pages of affected articles. The request edit template can be useful in that situation. In addition, the Wikimedia Foundations' terms of use require that any editor must disclose their employer or client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which they receive, or expect to receive, payment.
 * 2) It is totally disingenuous to cite the failure of the Duplication Detector to find duplication in content of pages as evidence that there isn't any when you have copied content, so that you must know full well that there is duplication there. You must also have a very low expectation of the intelligence of Wikipedia administrators, since you seem to think that we are too stupid to check for ourselves and see the duplication that you have denied existed. I also note that this is not the first time you have denied the existence of duplication which you must have known existed, as you yourself did the copying, as noted above.
 * 3) Wikipedia policy does not permit editing for the purpose of advertising or promotion of any sort. There are no ifs, buts, or exceptions.
 * 4) Editors who after being warned persist in editing in ways which are disruptive, unconstructive, or contrary to Wikipedia policy may be blocked from editing. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:45, 9 July 2017 (UTC)