User talk:Mrbusta

Donnie Davies
Hi, I noticed you made some changes to the Donnie Davies article. As you can see, the article is being reviewed for deletion as Feburary 2, 2007. If you're interested, please participate in the discussion! Thanks. --SquatGoblin 18:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Bill_Quick.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bill_Quick.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source 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. 07:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Bill_Quick.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Bill_Quick.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. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 03:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Challenge of the Super-Duper Friends
The article Challenge of the Super-Duper Friends has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki 10:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

R.C. sexual abuse edits
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. As a member of the Wikipedia community, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information of living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article must include proper sources. --Anietor 01:58, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Briggitte Harris
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Briggitte Harris, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Briggitte Harris seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Briggitte Harris, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 12:43, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

BLP warning
I have removed material from that does not comply with our policy on the biographies of living persons. Biographical material must always be referenced from reliable sources, especially negative material. Negative material that does not comply with that must be immediately removed. Note that the removal does not imply that the information is either true or false.

Please do not reinsert this material unless you can provide reliable citations, and can ensure it is written in a neutral tone. Please review the relevant policies before editing in this regard. Editors should note that failure to follow this policy may result in the removal of editing privileges.--Docg 21:39, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Vows of silence
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Vows of silence, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.vowsofsilencefilm.com/film.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) 23:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Press releases are still copyrighted, unless you can demonstrate they were released under a free license. Furthermore, changing one or two words in a sentence does not avoid copyright violation. You need to completely re-write the article in your own words (and while you are at it, make sure you can cite multiple independent sources which establish the notability of the film... see WP:NF). -Andrew c [talk] 16:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I noticed your comments
You dislike Abuse cases, which is fine. I'm sure the template could be improved. You mentioned that it links abuse cases that have nothing to do with each other. I've been working hard on the template to seek to group like with like. Your comment means I haven't succeeded, certainly as well as I would like.

Would you mind popping over to the talk page there and making a start at reaching a consensus for improvement? You're obviously welcome to improve it yourself, but you may not be familiar with the rather arcane template language syntax.

The objective when the template was created was and remains to create a navigation tool to let a researcher navigate with reasonable ease between abuse cases of as near similar types as can be grouped within a template. It's also intended to be economical with article real estate. If you can come up with a better design or concept and we can reach a consensus on it that would be great.

It has a different function from SACC and I think both are needed, as I've said in that deletion discussion. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 16:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of William Thomas Quick for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William Thomas Quick 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/William Thomas Quick & 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. Thargor Orlando (talk) 19:06, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

"Clerical abuse" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Clerical abuse. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 29 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm (talk) 21:52, 29 May 2020 (UTC)