User talk:Riversoflife

Image copyright problem with Image:Wheremap.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Wheremap.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Rol logo 2007.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Rol logo 2007.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Wheremap.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Wheremap.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 21:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC) --B (talk) 21:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

The article Rivers of Life, Oxford has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. J Milburn (talk) 15:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Rivers of Life, Oxford
A tag has been placed on Rivers of Life, Oxford, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN we need to talk.  &bull; 15:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

The article Rivers of Life, Oxford has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article seemed to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. J Milburn (talk) 15:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Distribution of Rivers of Life Churches by Country.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Distribution of Rivers of Life Churches by Country.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. Additionally, if you continue uploading bad images, you may be blocked from uploading. STBotI (talk) 21:16, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Jorge_Pradas.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jorge_Pradas.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, then 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, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. 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 Fair use, 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 uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 17:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Jorge Pradas
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Jorge Pradas, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Jorge Pradas seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Jorge Pradas, 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. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 02:01, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of "Roberts Pianos"
A page you created, Roberts Pianos, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is obvious advertising or promotional material.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thanks. Regards, CycloneNimrod talk? contribs? 11:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles where you are the author/primary contributor. This is often considered vandalism. You should instead place at the appropriate place in the article and address the issues on the article's talkpage. Jasynnash2 (talk) 14:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Your article "Roberts Pianos" has been nominated for deletion. Deletion will occur if a consensus of the Wikipedia community agrees to the deletion. Please do not remove the notice of debate - doing so is vandalism. You can explain why you think the article should not be deleted by following the link to the debate and adding your views. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Please do not remove AfD tags from articles until they have undergone the proper procedures as detailed in the deletion policy. This is often considered vandalism. You should instead address the issue at the article's AfD page. Jasynnash2 (talk) 14:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Roberts Pianos
A tag has been placed on Roberts Pianos requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. ArglebargleIV (talk) 12:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Repost of Roberts Pianos
A tag has been placed on, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a. If you can indicate how Roberts Pianos is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template hangon underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:Roberts Pianos saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please feel free to use deletion review, but do not continue to repost the article if it is deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions. ArglebargleIV (talk) 12:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Repost of Roberts Pianos
A tag has been placed on, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a. If you can indicate how Roberts Pianos is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template hangon underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:Roberts Pianos saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please feel free to use deletion review, but do not continue to repost the article if it is deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions. ArglebargleIV (talk) 11:36, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

August 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, the username you have chosen seems to imply that you are editing on behalf of a group, company or website.

There are two issues with this :
 * 1) You may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, you must exercise great caution when editing on topics related to your organization.
 * 2) Your account cannot represent a group of people. You may wish to create a new account with a username that represents only you. Alternatively, you may consider changing your username to avoid giving the impression that your personal account is being used for promotional purposes.

Regardless of whether you change your name or create a new account, you are not exempted from the guideline to avoid editing where you have a conflict of interest. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations.The article in question is Rivers of Life. Thank you. -- Rrburke (talk) 02:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

January 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, your account has been blocked; you are welcome to create a new account with a username that represents only you.

Additionally, it appears your account is intended to be used for the purpose of telling the world about an organization or cause that you consider worthwhile. Unfortunately, many charitable causes and social service organizations are not sufficiently notable for their own Wikipedia article, and all users are discouraged from editing in any area where they have an inherent conflict of interest. If your username doesn't represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text below this notice. Thank you.  K rakatoa    K atie   01:07, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Rivers of Life, Oxford for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rivers of Life, Oxford 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/Rivers of Life, Oxford until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. RomanSpa (talk) 09:06, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rol logo 2007.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Rol logo 2007.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 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:45, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:RoL Conf 08.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:RoL Conf 08.jpg, which you've attributed to Samuel McCulloch. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add permission pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. Here is a list of your uploads. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax &laquo;&brvbar;talk&brvbar;&raquo; 12:24, 6 April 2023 (UTC)