User talk:Joe Capricorn

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: 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 need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Arfenhouse
I see that the Arfenhouse article has been deleted for failing WP:WEB even though it doesn't. I had a big page written explaining that too but I saved it in Word and decided to keep it short. Is there a way to start talk page on restoring the Arfenhouse article? Joe Capricorn 07:20, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The procedure for this would be a deletion review.--Rosicrucian 15:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Rather than an essay explaining why we got it wrong, you might be better off working on a short version of the article that demonstrates that we did. The problems discussed in Articles for deletion/Arfenhouse are twofold, and related: it was believed it didn't meet WP:WEB, and perhaps more importantly, there was no sign of any reliable verifiable sources discussing the topic in any depth. (The definition of "reliable sources" is strict. It doesn't include blogs, forums, user-editable review sites, or self-published sources of any kind.) There need to be secondary sources too: not only material published by the makers of Arfenhouse.

You could work on such an article in your user-space, like at User:Joe Capricorn/Arfenhouse, then either ask around if people agreed it belongs here, or take it to Deletion review. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

AFA "vandal"
I think the edit that is being discussed here is the added category of 'hate groups'; I saw this as a childish attempt at 'humorous vandalism' (such as replacing 'darts' in the dart board article with 'children'.) I did not check to see if this added category was, in fact, accurate or not, but my assumption was, having 'family' in the acronym, that the edit was nothing but a joke. My usual job is to have a few hundred edits to go through in a matter of a couple of hours, so I tend to go off on blind assumptions in an attempt to keep up with the massive amount of edits made to WikiPedia each day. If you feel that category is accurately placed, then feel free to re-add it; but don't be suprised if someone else removes it too. - Kri  bb  eh  16:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


 * To a void any conflict I will not attempt to re-add the link to list of purported hate groups in the AFA page, nor will I add any such link with any borderline hate groups / pro-family groups such as Exodus International or Focus on the Family. Also, I did not intend on committing any vandalism - otherwise I would've done more than add a link. If I do any further edits, it would be backed up with credible resources from now on. For now, I'll be focusing on expanding the article on Bernville, Pennsylvania (my home town) as soon as I get more acquainted with Wikipedia. --Joe Capricorn 19:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Priscilla Ahn

 * Yeah, it looks like she meets the WP:BIO standard. I don't know why it was previously speedy deleted, I can't see the deleted version. By the way, she's cute. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 05:46, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm on terra incognita in re the music world, but WP:MUSIC is the notability standard for bands. If reliable sources back up those standards, then the band is in. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 06:18, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Kenblockdrift.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Kenblockdrift.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like PD-self (to release all rights), (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 20:48, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kenblockdrift.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Kenblockdrift.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:29, 19 March 2017 (UTC)