User talk:PhilC.

Image:Enslavedband.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Enslavedband.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 09:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Hoest1.jpg
I have tagged Image:Hoest1.jpg as replaceable fair use. If you wish to dispute this assertion, please add to the image description page and a comment explaining your reasoning to the the image talk page. Rettetast 16:15, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Doedskvad.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Doedskvad.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Taakeband.jpg)
 Thanks for uploading Image:Taakeband.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. J Milburn (talk) 22:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

February 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Looking at this edit, I believe there might be a conflict of interest as well. Nymf talk/contr. 18:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I disagree first with your assertion, given that I have been adding links to plenty of sites, including Blabbermouth, Blistering, SMN and so forth. Nor am I trying to promote my website in search engines or anything of that sort—it does perfectly fine as it is. AngryMetalGuy.com is professional reviews of heavy metal bands, just like Blistering.com is, links which you left in place. In fact, so as to mitigate any claim that I was biasing anything towards myself I started actively seeking other reviews as well, because many of these posts lack reviews. AngryMetalGuy.com is good enough to use as a source for plenty of other things, which it's been used for (not by my insertion). Why does it not count as professional reviews? PhilC. (talk) 10:47, 18 February 2010 (UTC)