User talk:Kinshuksunil

Image copyright problem with Image:Logosrcc.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Logosrcc.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. 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 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 OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 06:22, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:SRCC_Main.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SRCC_Main.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. 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 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 OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 06:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:SRCC Main.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:SRCC Main.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 23:59, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:GBO EnMasse logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:GBO EnMasse logo.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image 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 image 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 04:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of En masse (gbo)
A tag has been placed on En masse (gbo), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. //  Chris  (complaints) • (contribs) 07:09, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

February 2008
Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. Please use the template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of OSScamp


The article OSScamp has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No independent, reliable third-party sources cited, see Notability (organizations and companies)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I see you have removed the PROD notice. The problem with the article remains notability - there is only one third-party reference that might meet WP:RS and it appears that you wrote it, so it is not independent. The organization's own website is not an independent third-aprty source and a blog is not a reliable source. A quick search on Google News finds nothing on this topic. I am taking this article to WP:AfD Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 15:31, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the note on my talk page. Just to reassure you a little bit, the article will not be deleted based on your conflict of interest. The main reason it is being considered for deletion is an apparent lack of notability under Wikipedia's rules. The guideline at Notability (organizations and companies) states "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." Reliable is defined by WP:RS and does not include blogs, so current ref 4 (Manu K Mohan's blog) is not a RS. Current refs 1 and 3 are from OSScamp's own website, so they are not secondary sources. That leaves ref 2, which you apparently wrote, so it is not independent and even if it were OK, one source does not make for "significant coverage". On the WP:AfD page the news search link finds seven sources, but two are about OSScube and the other five appear to be press releases from OSScamp itself. What this article needs is mutiple sources from independent third-party reliable sources like newspapers or magazines or tech websites. I am not an expert in this area and do not know where to find these sources (if they exist) beyond the places where I have already looked online. If you know of surch sources, please add them to the article and comment on the AfD as soon as you can. Thanks, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:59, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments. First off, in the future please post on my talk page, not my user page. Second, as you might imagine, there are many organizations and groups out there who seek to use Wikipedia for publicity and promotion. The guidelines on Notability are meant to provide a consistent set of criteria for judging whether or not something can be included on Wikipedia. The AfD will decide whether or not the article will be deleted, not I (so your arguments would be better made there - there is a link to it on the top of the article page). Finally, please read WP:RS. Wikipedia is not a reliable source (since anyone can edit it). My suggestion to you is to try and make sure that news organizations or other reliable sources cover your future unconferences / camps. So far having the most reliable source cited be something written by you in an article that says " Kinshuk Sunil is one of the most active volunteers of the community, who plays an active role in the organisation of every camp." does not seem like a good omen. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 19:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

COI Notice
If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of OSScamp
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is OSScamp. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/OSScamp. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Clarification
Thanks for your additions to the AfD page. I just wanted to make sure that you understand that I think the OSScamps are a good idea and I have nothing against them, I am just not sure that they meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines at this time. WHatever the outcome of the AfD, I hope you will stick around here and contribute more to the encyclopedia. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:41, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Definitely mate! I have no hard feelings at all. The policies is what makes Wikipedia. I am very glad and motivated by your efforts to uphold them. It is not my intention to bend/violate these policies either. I am only saddened that the community I am talking about is not actively supporting me here on Wikipedia. And this issue of singularity - my pervasiveness - when it comes to promoting OSScamps is also something I am not happy about. Maybe the community has some weaknesses as well. But I am trying to do my best to promote and propagate it. That is one reason, for me, why a wiki page for OSScamps makes sense. Kinshuk Sunil (talk) 07:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer be able to have them marked as minor by default. For more information on what a minor edit is, see WP:MINOR or feel to get in touch.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:19, 13 March 2011 (UTC)