User talk:JackTinWNY

Image copyright problem with Image:FaithBW.jpg
I did discuss this with the artist, and she agreed to release the photo to the public domain. I attempted to annotate the photo as such. Apparently I failed. I will try again when I have a chance.

Thank you for uploading Image:FaithBW.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 image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 16:28, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking care of the license tags. My lingering concern about this image is that it is used in the article primarily to illustrate Faith Page, but WP:NFC states that nonfree photos of living people used only for identification are usually regarded as replaceable. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 19:15, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Your concerns
Hi, thanks for getting back to me on this. I shall check with the artist and see if she will agree to release this photo to the public domain. Thanks... Jack


 * I noticed the license was changed to GFDL, which is a free license. That's great! I guess that means you were successful in getting a copyright permission from the photographer. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 22:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Carl, Thanks for your help. Yes, she released the page and the photo, and I sent a copy of her release to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

Unspecified source for Image:FaithBW.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:FaithBW.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 13:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

December 2008
When adding links to material on an external site, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:09, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Link access procedure
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Link access procedure, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.linktionary.com/l/lap.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 14:37, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation
for (talk)  11:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Universal Alcatel for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Universal Alcatel 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/Universal Alcatel until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. –eggofreasontalk 18:08, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of G.704


The article G.704 has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (software) requirement."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. ElectroChip123 (talk) 02:47, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Multilink Procedure


The article Multilink Procedure has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "cursory reading makes it seem like the topic is a bit ill defined. Like there are multiple kinds of related procedures, and coverage of this topic is probably better served on other pages. additionally there isn't exactly a plethora of helpful sources."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 26 June 2024 (UTC)