User talk:RedDirtRedBird

Nomination of Smith Music Group for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Smith Music Group 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/Smith Music Group until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Bingo bro  (Chat)  09:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Issuing level 1 warning about removing AfD template from articles before the discussion is complete. (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8))
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Smith Music Group. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. This is an automated message from a bot about, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—cyberbot I  Talk to my owner :Online 18:30, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello RedDirtRedBird, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Smith Music Group have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Copyrights. You may also want to review Copy-paste.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Translation. See also Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 20:03, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Smith Music Group Logo.jpeg
Thanks for uploading File:Smith Music Group Logo.jpeg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:07, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

October 2020
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Amelia Presley, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 08:26, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

November 2020
You did not verify the date of birth. That isn’t vandalism. You’ve shown no citations. It’s nothing personal. RedDirtRedBird (talk) 18:39, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, it is not vandalism nor personal, but you are WP:POINTING, and disruptive editing is equally bad. (CC) Tb hotch ™ 19:09, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You need to check before you dive in. It is written on his burial stone, and there is more than a few references that verify his DOB, where he was born, where he lived and so on. The fact there isn't a reference on it, is neither here nor there, particularly since the guy is so well know and he has a Dutch and German Wikipedia article to boot. The policy is to assume WP:AGF, if there is already an article on one other WP, so it is taken as a given. But as a ceramicist and sculptor of national importance, it would probably be better to ask.   scope_creep Talk  20:13, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

How am I disruptively editing? I removed something that I saw no reference for. It wasn’t to make a point. You’ve pointed out the references, great. Thank you. But nothing I did was any more disruptive than any editor making any sort of edit. You cannot tell me that you’ve never removed information that had no references. I removed the information one time, you reverted it and called it vandalism. If it’s verified through a headstone that I missed, then so be it. RedDirtRedBird (talk) 08:10, 6 November 2020 (UTC)