User talk:Petermeg


 * }

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Luke mcmaster.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Luke mcmaster.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 16:30, 15 April 2011 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Lukebox
Template:Lukebox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. —teb728 t c 20:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi - Looking for help/direction pls on Luke Mcmaster page - Have tried very hard to answer/correct criticisms levied according to the "boxed headers" on the page, plus, have tried to answer all the questions regarding the picture of Luke, including the name of the original photographer (although cannot find any way to navigate back to my original subission to try to understand what it is that I'm being told, regarding an impending deletion - Would appreciate all/any help or direction - Thank you. Peter Glen  Petermeg (talk) 19:02, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I removed your email address so spammers won't harvest it. People will reply here. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:59, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello, Petermeg. I removed the notability template, as you seem to have enough reliable, third party sources to fit the general notability guideline. As for the conflict of interest template, that will probably stick around until other people actually edit the article, assuming you do actually have a conflict of interest with the subject. The most important one to address is the lack of references. You need to find reliable sources that can back up all of the information in the article. See WP:When to cite for information regarding that. You might also find the citation templates to be useful in formatting your citations. They are not necessary, but they do simplify things. These are easily used by clicking the "Cite" button on the editing toolbar, selecting the appropriate template from the drop-down menu, and filling out the information.


 * Regarding the issues with the image... The current photo that's being used in the infobox appears to be fine. Someone has sent in the OTRS ticket, so it's all set. Is there another image with which you are having issues? – GorillaWarfare talk • contribs

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)