User talk:Tomanic

Welcome!

 * }

October 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Electronic bagpipes has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.myspace.com/redpipesbagpipes. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 16:27, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Promotional material on Electronic bagpipes
Greetings, I've removed some (but not all) of the content you added to electronic bagpipes, as a lot of it seemed to be promoting the redpipes brand rather than discussing the overall concept of electronic bagpipes, including sound samples, a description of the product line, and links to the company's sites. MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:11, 12 October 2010 (UTC)


 * You really need to hit "Preview" and make sure your edits don't mess up the page layout. You've tried twice to add Category:Bagpipes, Gaita, Great Highland Bagpipe, Cornemuse, but there is no such category, so it's a dead redlink.  The category is Category:Bagpipes, which ensures that this page shows up listed with all the other kinds of bagpipe.  The Categories appear below the editing window when you hit Preview (which I admit is somewhat counterintuitive), but you really want to make sure any categories you add/modify are actual functioning categories, otherwise the article gets lost.


 * I've also retained just the pic of the non-blowing Redpipes, since there's no real reason to have pics of the whole product line, and that basic red model is a pretty good example of its type and quite sufficient. I realise you like/support Redpipes, but unless they become the absolutely dominant type of pipe on the market, they can't be the bulk of the article's examples.  MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:29, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Problems with upload of File:Redpipe classic red.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Redpipe classic red.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Media copyright questions.

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

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 14:05, 17 October 2010 (UTC)