User talk:Rsullivan9597

A tag has been placed on The Riyra Chronicles, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under 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.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Nihiltres(t.c.s) 19:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Crown Conspiracy
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Crown Conspiracy, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. CalendarWatcher (talk) 13:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Michael James Sullivan (author)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Michael James Sullivan (author), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. CalendarWatcher (talk) 13:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Todd_fonseca_2010.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Todd_fonseca_2010.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Melesse (talk) 20:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Orbit Books (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Daniel Abraham, Christopher Moore, Kate Griffin, Sean Williams and Mike Carey

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 04:39, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Unfettered Anthology edited by Shawn Speakman.jpeg cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Unfettered Anthology edited by Shawn Speakman.jpeg cover.jpg, which you've sourced to http://grimoakpress.com/unfettered/. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created 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 , 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 OTRS 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 .

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 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. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. David 1217  What I've done 15:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Unfettered, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Daniel Abraham and Mark Lawrence (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Theft of swords 169 250.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Theft of swords 169 250.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is [ a list of your uploads].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Stefan2 (talk) 14:06, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Unfettered for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Unfettered 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/Unfettered 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 template from the top of the article. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 08:36, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Reliable sources
I've noticed that you have been editing articles, which is good, but I would really like for you to look over WP:RS for what is considered to be a reliable source. You tend to add a lot of non-notable book blogs, which are almost never usable as reliable sources when it comes to showing notability and really aren't supposed to be added to articles in general because they're not considered to be a reliable source in the slightest. The only exceptions are in those very, very rare circumstances when you have someone who is considered to be such an absolute authority that they're quoted in reliable sources such as books, peer-reviewed journals, news articles, and the like. What this means is that the only blogs you can usually use are ones that are by notable people. When you do have one of these, be careful to check to see if they are related to the subject at all. This makes them a primary source (WP:PRIMARY) and you can't use them to show notability. No matter how many unreliable sources you use, they cannot show notability and actually tend to undermine the notability of an article more than they actually help it. I really suggest that you utilize Reliable sources/Noticeboard, as you appear to be very green when it comes to discerning reliable sources. I don't mean this as an insult, just saying that the majority of sources you're adding do not show notability and have to be removed.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 08:57, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Ridan Publishing for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ridan Publishing 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/Ridan Publishing 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 template from the top of the article. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 09:15, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I swear that this is not an agenda against you, just that I'm seeing a trend of you creating a lot of articles that lack reliable sources. I would recommend that if you want to keep any of these, you should look into userfying (WP:USERFY) a copy in your userspace to work on until sources become available.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 09:15, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Theft of swords 169 250.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Theft of swords 169 250.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:15, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Unfettered Anthology edited by Shawn Speakman.jpeg cover.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Unfettered Anthology edited by Shawn Speakman.jpeg cover.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:19, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Ridan logo 160.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Ridan logo 160.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. 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.

ATTENTION : This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 24 February 2017 (UTC)