User talk:J baer25

File permission problem with File:Hazem Beltagui, black and white press photo, Mar 2018.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Hazem Beltagui, black and white press photo, Mar 2018.jpg, which you've attributed to Hazem Beltagui. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:04, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Hazem Beltagui for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hazem Beltagui is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Hazem Beltagui until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:58, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Hazem Beltagui


A tag has been placed on Hazem Beltagui, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 deleted 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. Atlantic306 (talk) 19:38, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Reply
Hi, thanks for message. If you post an article it will be assessed as it stands. If you don't want that to happen, you should write it as a draft. I deleted your article because
 * it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that he meets the notability guidelines. It is now Wikipedia policy that biographical articles about living people must have independent verifiable references, as defined in the link, or they will be deleted. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the him or an associated company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the he or his management claim or interviewing him. You gave no references of any kind. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls
 * you gave some external links, but these again were social media or other self-posts. The only external link you should normally have is his own main website.
 * It's a fanpage/promo with no verifiable facts, and it's difficult to see any evidence that he meets the notability criteria we require here
 * it was written in a highly promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced or self-sourced claims presented as fact include: has graced the stages... a deep infatuation with music... a primordial love for music... Possessing a vast spectrum of sounds and influences... derives inspiration from the plethora of music that has always surrounded him... a world-renowned DJ and producer and so on throughout, it's gushing fan page with no verifiable facts, just claims of how wonderful he is.
 * the article was a copyright violation of this page. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. The copied site was marked Copyright © 2018 Resident Advisor Ltd. All rights reserved.. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial but there is no indication that the copied site allows free use. Text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient. But in any case the copyrighted text is far too promotional to be useful for Wikipedia's purposes, so there would not be any point in your jumping through all the hoops that are required.
 * If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it. In particular, if you work directly or indirectly for him or his record company, or otherwise are acting on his behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly. Regardless, if you are paid directly or indirectly by him or an affiliated organisation, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:    . If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.

We often restore deleted text on request, but for legal reasons we don't do so for copyright violations. In any case, there was little factual content in your unreferenced draft, and it was highly promotional, so better to start from scratch.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article. You must also reply to the COI request above Jimfbleak - talk to me?  05:59, 23 June 2018 (UTC)