User talk:Mark.s.patrick

Article edited
I've edited this article and requested additional feedback from Excirial. Mark S. Patrick (talk) 17:04, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of The Joint Staff - Information Management Division
A tag has been placed on The Joint Staff - Information Management Division requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 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. Excirial ( Talk, Contribs ) 09:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Newington Marker.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Newington Marker.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:05, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Information professional
I removed most of what you added to Information professional for numerous reasons, mainly POV and NOT concerns. Granted, the article is in poor shape and AIIM publications could be very helpful, but the content with the single indirectly-linked source came across as more an ad for their training than anything else. I've added the article to my watchlist, and I'll do my best to respond to any discussion. --Ronz (talk) 15:49, 8 October 2016 (UTC)