User talk:Yeswolf

YESWOLF is a screen name I have used for decades. It is not my name. I am actor Van Epperson. I have a thorough listing on the imdb.com and a website at www.VanEpperson.com. There are many listings for me on the internet. I had a brief Wikipedia page for 20 years or so that has disappeared for no apparent or legitimate reason. I am trying to get a new page created for me or to reinstate the deleted page but I am not Wikipedia savvy and do not know how to create the page.

I do not want a Wikipedia page called YESWOLF. I want a page called VAN EPPERSON. I am an actor, director, writer, public speaker, mentor, acting coach and acting teacher established in Hollywood since 1990. My listing on the imdb can be found at https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0258371/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0.

There was no reason to remove the Wikipedia page for Van Epperson and whatever discussion took place in reference to doing that was clearly misguided and the result inappropriate.

Please reinstate my page properly or create a new one that is acceptable by Wikipedia standards. I do not mean to violate any Wikipedia rules.

All images on my website (www.VanEpperson.com) are owned by me and Wikipedia has full permission to publish any of them.

Thank you.

Image:Van Epperson in 2004.jpg
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:Van Epperson in 2004.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because images on Wikipedia need to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License or another free license, which allow anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license GFDL-self to license it under the GFDL, or cc-by-sa-3.0 to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use PD-self to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file, please understand that the vast majority of images found on the internet are not appropriate for Wikipedia. Most content on the internet is copyrighted and the creator of the image has exclusive rights to use it. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others - do not upload images that violate others' copyrights. In certain limited cases, we may be able to use an image under a claim of fair use - if you are certain that fair use would apply here, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list. If no fair use rationale applies, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Media copyright questions. Thank you. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 18:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Van Epperson in 2006.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Van Epperson in 2006.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Deadstar (talk) 09:54, 8 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello and thank you for your message on my talk page. I apologise that the request has offended you, this was not the intention. The reason that the image was marked for deletion is to ensure all is well with the copyrights, and you confirmed in your message that things are ok. It is important that this permission is listed with Wikipedia. I would request you read the below template, and if you agree that all is the way it should be, copy the email and send it from your email address to the address mentioned. I will mark the image with an "awaiting permission email" template in the mean time. Please don't hesitate to ask if you have further questions. Thanks and kind regards Deadstar (talk) 09:39, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

To: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org I hereby affirm that I, Van Epperson, am the sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the media work as shown here:. The image was taken for me by Christopher Anderson. I agree to publish the above-mentioned content under the multiple free licenses as attached currently (GNU 1.2 or later / Creative Commons Attribution 3.0, 2.5, 2.0 and 1.0) I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

[Your name] [Date]


 * PS - It is helpful if you could note here (or on the image) when you have sent your email. There is a sizeable backlog for these type of permissions, so it could be a while before the notice is removed, and tracing the email/permission is easier with more information. Thanks Deadstar (talk) 09:45, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Response To Your Message
I have done as you requested -- i.e., copied the text you supplied regarding copyright and emailed to the address you posted. Please confirm to me that my photo is no longer in danger of being removed from Wikipedia and thank your for your response & help.

In the future, if I post a new photo of myself, how do I make sure this does not happen again? Thanks.

VAN EPPERSON


 * Hello & that was quick! Thanks very much for your email and reply. Things that can help with copyright questions:
 * 1) If you have your photos published on your official webpage, note the free license on that page. If you (or anyone else for that matter) link it from the upload on wikipedia, it is then a question of simply looking it up to confirm that the image is freely licensed.
 * 2) You can send an email for every single upload, but as that might be a bit tedious, send a clear statement that your wikipedia account is authorized to licence your works. But beware that you are only the copyright holder of your own portrait in this case because you specifically asked someone to take the photo ("work-for-hire"). In general, whoever takes the photo owns the copyright.


 * (If you want more information on copyrights, and a list of free licenses available, try Licensing)
 * Seeing that a free license is pending, I will also move your image from the English wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons, the image repository. There is no difference in the way it is used, but it makes it possible for wikipedias in other languages to link to the file, and it could be easier for people outside wikipedia to find.


 * I hope that helps. Kind regards, Deadstar (talk) 10:13, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * PS: Apologies & last request - Can you check the email you sent has the full path to the image (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Van_Epperson_in_2006.jpg or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Van_Epperson_in_2006.jpg as I noticed my template above only has "[3]" as I linked it.

Copyright Permissions Email Submitted To Wikipedia
As requested above by Deadstar, I have submitted the appropriate copyright permissions regarding my personal photo to Wikipedia.

Letter Sent Again with Full Link Title As Requested
I hope this takes care of this issue.

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Yeswolf


A tag has been placed on User:Yeswolf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Articles for deletion/Van Epperson. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GPL93 (talk) 15:38, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Van epperson


A tag has been placed on Van epperson, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.
 * It is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. (See section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, 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. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jack Frost (talk) 06:24, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

On the speedy deletion of Van epperson
Yeswolf, I felt like not enough context was given into the deletion of the Van Epperson article and the speedy deletion of the subsequent one (both of which were not done by me) so I've taken the time to explain it myself.
 * 1) This speedy deletion about the article is about how you seemed to have added a discussion about the subject matter rather than the article itself, which is good reason for speedy deletion.
 * 2) If you really do want to make an article about yourself (which you probably shouldn't), you should make sure to disclose a conflict of interest.
 * 3) Looking at the discussion which caused the initial deletion, it was deemed that the article did not contain enough reliable sources (IMDB is not a reliable source) and as a result was not deemed to be notable enough for an article. The main notability guidelines associated for this are WP:GNG and WP:ENTERTAINER.

Hopefully this clarifies things! When replying, please reply with (which will notify me). dibbydib boop or snoop 07:10, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the note. Sorry I am not more savvy with Wikipedia use -- if I should NOT create a new article myself, what SHOULD I do?  Have the Wikipedia writer I have secured submit it himself?  How do we get around the deletion of my previous articles?  Cause it seems like I am not allowed to create a new one because the old one was deleted.  If you want, you can email me directly at yeswolf@undefinedsbcglobal.net (I hope it's OK for me to put that here.)  What you cite above about what I had added was likely due to my lack of knowledge about how Wikipedia submissions work, which is why I have secured a guy who knows all about writing for Wikipedia, so the next, more extensive article, will more likely be accepted.  I would LOVE to talk with you about all this if at all possible so I can get this done without much more confusion.  3108586709 or 3105928675.
 * Though it is discouraged by Wikipedia to make articles about yourself, it doesn't stop you from doing it, and you can go right ahead. If you're looking for help on editing, it's strongly enouraged to check the teahouse, the main place to ask for help on editing Wikipedia.
 * I myself am just an editor and don't really communicate about Wikipedia editing elsewhere so I most likely won't be able to answer anything off of the Wikipedia site. Again, the teahouse is the best place to be in terms of asking for help in editing Wikipedia (or just asking how it works). dibbydib boop or snoop 10:01, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Yeswolf


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Yeswolf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. <b style="font-family: Tw Cen MT; color: FireBrick">HapHaxion</b> (talk / contribs) 16:55, 21 March 2022 (UTC)