User talk:Sexypara

Image Tagging Image:Artwork images 684 24360 Lewis-Morley.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Artwork images 684 24360 Lewis-Morley.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL-self to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Tawker 03:36, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Tatjana Patitz‎
I have removed most of the information that you added to the Tatjana Patitz‎ article. Using words like statuesque and extraordinary violates Wikipedia's policy of keeping a neutral point of view and coming without sources constitutes original research. Dismas |(talk) 16:20, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Notability of CandoCo
A tag has been placed on CandoCo 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 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 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. Fattyjwoods ( Push my button  ) 03:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

April 2008
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. (EhJJ)TALK 23:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

May 2020
Hello, I'm Padgriffin. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Joe Orton—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Padgriffin Griffin Noises 10:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi Sexypara. That new section might be justified, but it currently looks like an essay, lacking good secondary sources. I wonder would you care to discuss at the Talk page before re-adding it? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)