User talk:Mustang278

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 ask your question there. Again, welcome! Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 16:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Regarding your new articles.
While I have regrettably labeled your articles for deletion, as they seem to be about unnotable people, I do reccomend that, in the future, you focus on making one article to at least a good quality before you make a new one. If you need any help, let me know on my talk page -- febtalk 23:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC) and I would like to complement you on your effort to remove NPOV statements from your articles. Thank you -- febtalk 23:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm adding these articles to CAT:CSD because they do not seem to have any notability. It's not a matter of cleaning the pages. -- febtalk 23:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not an arbitrator, I'm just bringing up the subject for other people to decide on. You might find the criteria on WP:BIO of interest. -- febtalk 23:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * First of all, I do have reason to remove it, under WP:NPOV. If you can cite sources, and change it to something such as "x and x newspapers said that he was x sort of a person, it would be more in line with WP standards. In addition, I reccomend you read WP:NPA before you make rude remarks to other editors, and put a reason on the talk page of your article like the hangon tag recommends. -- febtalk 01:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * First of all, when I post on your page, I sign my posts, please do the same for me. If you do not know how to do this, it is simply done by typing ~ after your posts. In addition, please do not post direct quotes on my talk page, please instead provide me a link. External links can be provided by typing  . Now that that's out of the way, no, I was not patronizing you, I was complimenting you on your efforts to remove NPOV from the article, and in the process improve to wiki. In regards to the comment, the meaning of that is that this person does not show any signs that he's deserving of being in wikipedia, that he has contributed anything major to humanity or history.. See the AfD disscussion for List of Coalition Troops killed in Iraq; being dead doesn't make you notable.
 * Also, I see that you still have not added any debate for the article on it's talk page, cleaned the article at all, or read WP:NPA. Really, wikipedia isn't for arguing with people, it's for spreading knowledge. If you want to argue with me, that's fine and all as long as you keep it civil, but I reccomend you focus on your article. I know it's not easy to make a new article (I recently created one myself), but if you intend to argue about it, you should defend it -- febtalk 02:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, after re-reading WP:AWW, my use of seems wasn't a weasel word at all. Please do not make unfounded accusations -- febtalk 03:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * An admin (the people who delete articles, not myself) has reviewed your article and decided it is not suitable for speedy, so please, improve the article to wikipedia standards and point out how exactly the person involved is notable instead of getting angry at me for bringing the subject to an admin in the first place. As I mentioned above, you shouldn't really be complaining with other wikipedians about their views on an article if you aren't working to improve it. I'll give you time to improve the article before I nominate it for WP:AfD for nn. -- febtalk 03:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Again, if you post on my talk page, please format your posts in the way i've established, as I do not enjoy having to clean it up needlessly. Now, that link is not for Wikipedia, but some other wiki, which does not seem to be connected to the wikimedia project. As far as I can find, there are no guidelines against using the word seem on Wikipedia, if you see one, feel free to point it out. As a word, and in usage, seems is fine. I'm not saying that person x isn't important, i'm saying he doesn't seem important. I'm not saying wikipedian y is vandalizing, i'm saying their edits appear to be the actions of a vandal. In the mean time, I see that while you have time to go researching articles on other wikis and being rude to fellow wikipedians who are trying to help you to contribute to wikipedia, you don't have time to improve the articles which you defend, as I have suggested three times now. I highly recommend you work on that, and bring it up to wikipedia standards before I nominate it for deletion. -- febtalk 03:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Carroll.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Carroll.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. 08:29, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problem
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Tennessee Journal of Practice and Procedure, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.law.memphis.edu/tjpp/index.htm, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Tennessee Journal of Practice and Procedure and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Tennessee Journal of Practice and Procedure with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Tennessee Journal of Practice and Procedure.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at Talk:Tennessee Journal of Practice and Procedure/Temp. Leave a note at Talk:Tennessee Journal of Practice and Procedure saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Alvestrand 21:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation in William Henry Carroll
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on William Henry Carroll, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because William Henry Carroll is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting William Henry Carroll, 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 18:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)