User talk:Revdrphd

Welcome!
Hello, Revdrphd, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: 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 have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! kelapstick(bainuu) 21:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Spa Manannan mac Lir


A tag has been placed on Spa Manannan mac Lir requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. kelapstick(bainuu) 21:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Abbeystrewery Cemetery
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Abbeystrewery Cemetery, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.freewebs.com/edweick/apps/blog/entries/show/2074730.

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. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 03:06, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Abbeystrewery Cemetery


A tag has been placed on Abbeystrewery Cemetery requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Safiel (talk) 03:27, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Cork city
Hiya. As part of a broader copyediting change, I removed some content a month or so ago. I explained in that edit why I was removing the content. Specifically, it had been tagged as missing citation or context since August 2012. It is a fundamental tenet of the project that content be cited and verifiable. I'm not certain what was intended by the assertion that this edit or impetus was somehow "nefarious" or influenced by drivers "unrelated to Wikipedia", but as the editor who made the change, I can but note that there is no basis for that assertion. The only impetus for the change was that it had been tagged as needing a cite for four years. If the statement can be supported by a reliable and verifiable reference, (and the context made somewhat clearer), then there is no issue restoring it. In the meantime it might be worth reading the policies about assuming good faith in the intentions of other editors. All the best. Guliolopez (talk) 10:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)