User talk:Westmc9th

From where do you know that the PA is continuing on 200 and 175 Greenwich Street?

175 Greenwich Street
If you want to re-add the statment that the PANYNJ is planning to continue work on the 175 and 200 Greenwich Street towers, please add a reliable reference to support the claim. Information on Wikipedia needs to be verifiable with reliable sources. Also, from what I can tell by checking the website, the PANYNJ makes no mention of continuing onward with construction despite the recession, and does not refute the statements made by the Daily News that the PA is the force behind the idea to reduce the buildings to "stumps." Cheers, Rai • me  03:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 2014 in the United States
A tag has been placed on 2014 in the United States, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Wperdue (talk) 00:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

2014 errors
There's no estimated completion date for any of the Greenwich Steet buildings at wtc.com, and, as I've pointed out elsewhere, 2014 or 2036 is absurd, even if it were on a credible web site. Furthermore, the completion date of the (formerly named) Freedom Tower might be suitable for a listing, the completion date of the 2nd or 3rd tower at the WTC site is not notable, per WP:recent years, and should be removed if you reinsert it. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 01:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

June 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Some of your recent edits have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been reverted or removed. Wikicalendar guidelines state that future events should not be added to calendar articles. Refer to WP:DOY for details on what are acceptable entries in Wikicalendar articles. Thank you. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 00:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 00:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

July 2009
Hello, and thank you for your contributions. It appears you are trying to add an image to the article Andrews Geyser that does not currently exist in either Wikipedia or Commons. Go to Upload for detailed instructions on how to upload images. Please note, however, that all images must be compatible with Wikipedia's image policy. Thank you.  Intelligent  sium  18:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Arrowhead Monument
Thanks for your contributions, but Arrowhead Monument is not a National Monument (United States). For that, it must be proclaimed by the President or created by an act of Congress, which the Arrowhead Monument is not. Reywas92 Talk 15:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Please stop adding "national monuments" that aren't
The term National Monument can only be designated by the president (as authorized by the Antiquities Act of 1906) or by Congress (according to the Organic Act of 1916 as modified by the Redwood Act of 1978). The "monuments" you tried to add are not designated as National Monuments and therefore unsuited for the official list. Please stop editing around this issue, the lists are complete and up to date. There are no other National Monuments missing. --h-stt !?  06:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

National Historic Landmark in North Carolina
National Historic Landmarks are only those that are designated by the Secretary of the Interior and listed in the Federal Register as such. The official list of NHL in North Carolina at http://www.nps.gov/nhl/designations/Lists/NC01.pdf does not list Andrews Geyser, which means it is not a NHL. Please stop adding non-designated landmarks to lists of official programs. --h-stt !?  06:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Old Fort, North Carolina
Great work on the article. In the lead, it says "The population was 1,021 at the 2008 estimated census which is the first time the towns population has reached aboved 1,000 since it was the futhermost reach of the U.S.".

The last part of the sentence is a little awkward. I know it was the most western stop for trains for a time, though I'm not sure if that's what is meant. A quick glance at the official website says it was a "Western outpost", so I'm not sure if it's referring to that too. Just needs some clarification. Thanks. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 08:40, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

440 South Church
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of 440 South Church, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.440southchurch.com/architecture.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 11:41, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Park Charlotte
A tag has been placed on The Park Charlotte requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Favonian (talk) 11:42, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 440 South Church
A tag has been placed on 440 South Church requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Favonian (talk) 11:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Davidson Fort
Hi, Nice contribution for Davidson Fort. I think the article should be re-written, though, as an article about the historical fort. Then, secondarily, it should mention that it is reopening. What do you think? I have started this discussion on the article's talk page so other editors can more easily contribute, so please continue the discussion there instead of here. Thanks!  -shirulashem (talk) 14:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Twin Towers 2
As a contributor to this article, you may be interested to know it has been nominated for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Twin Towers 2. Robofish (talk) 14:37, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Helen Eck
A tag has been placed on Helen Eck requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles – see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 14:52, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Helen eck
A tag has been placed on Helen eck requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles – see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a message on my talk page. @ 23:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Information.svg|25px]] Welcome to Wikipedia. A page you recently created, Helen eck, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for new pages, so it will shortly be removed (if it hasn't been already). Please use the sandbox for any tests, and consider using the Article Wizard. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. You may also want to read our introduction page to learn more about contributing. Thank you. Exploding Boy (talk) 23:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:GroundZero 20100919133155.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:GroundZero 20100919133155.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, 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, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. 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 Non-free content, 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 created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 18:24, 19 September 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MilborneOne (talk) 18:24, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problems with File:Wtcmemorial.jpg
Hello. Concerning your contribution, File:Wtcmemorial.jpg, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from Metadata credit - AP Photo/Mark Lennihan. As a copyright violation, File:Wtcmemorial.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. File:Wtcmemorial.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at File talk:Wtcmemorial.jpg and send an email with the message to . See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at File talk:Wtcmemorial.jpg with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on File talk:Wtcmemorial.jpg.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. MilborneOne (talk) 18:27, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mike Dunlap


A tag has been placed on Mike Dunlap requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. The Determinator p  t  c  01:52, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)