User talk:StarX

Satterlee Clocktower Pic
Hey, thanks for the comment. I took a picture of Satterlee, let me know what you think. I'm home right now, and I have a couple other pictures if this one won't work. It can probably be brightened...

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jondude11 (talk • contribs) 02:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC).

License tagging for Image:SourceFourPAR.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:SourceFourPAR.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 16:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

ETC Source Four Par
As of now, the page does not satisfy the primary notability criteria which focuses around secondary sources talking about the product. If WP:N is not met, it is pretty much up for speedy deletion. That being said, I'll give you some time to work on the page and gather sources so that it meets the criteria but if it can't, it will be deleted. Also, spam or advertising need not be from the people that create the product. Any article made by anyone can be considered advertising if it doesn't meet the criteria. Sasquatch t|c 21:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If you look at the bottom of the source four page under the references section there is both a website and a published book... But you're absolutely right, I don't know much about the theatre industry... but I'm sure if it's that commonly used and useful there must be something referencing it? If not, we can always put it to a community discussion or something... Sasquatch t|c 03:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I also found the page seems to be a duplicate of Source Four PAR. Which in it's current state doesn't satisfy WP:N either. Sasquatch t|c 04:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi TT
Menkatopia here, from Pots-Vegas. Nice to come across a friend. :-) Menkatopia 20:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Bryan S. Higby
I have nominated Bryan S. Higby, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Bryan S. Higby. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Doctorfluffy (talk) 17:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello StarX! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Alan Steinberg -

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:AltmanClamp.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:47, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

It turns out
…that the stub you created for Prompt book, drawing material from an about.com site, was plagiarised near verbatim from a study guide written for students to accompany Wainscott's textbook. Even more unfortunately, the extent to which the about.com author (link now dead), or you, modified the text you read, someone took it upon themselves to correct the text to source, so that now, the entire first paragraph, and the first sentence of the second paragraph are now verbatim to an on-market, copyrighted text. There is no insinuation here that you are at fault. But realize (i) that good sources are needed for all text that is added to the encyclopedia, and (ii) about.com is not a good source (nor are Cram 101 study guides). Cheers. Happy editing. Leprof 7272 (talk) 17:16, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Please, please
…please do not add material that is only from your personal experience. This violates WP:Original research. You need to be writing always from published sources, and these should be third-party (independent)—meaning, for instance, not from manufacturer's descriptions of their own products.

There will always be editors that break this rule. Editors of your experience and capability can stem the eroding tide of work here that adds material that is unverifiable (see WP:VERIFY). If you want to imagine where things might go, imagine the worst student paper you have ever read, and why it was so bad. Bonne chance, and if I might say (and not be understood), a wish for your work, merde (break a leg). Leprof 7272 (talk) 16:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!