User talk:Erikawitt

License tagging for Image:Centrallibrary.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Centrallibrary.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:

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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --OrphanBot 22:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regina Public Library

That is a valuable addition to the Regina article; however, it is disproportionately detailed in comparison with the descriptions of other institutions and facilities in the article and I wonder if it shouldn't go into its own separate article. This is particularly so given that the discussion appears to be oriented towards "mission statement" rather than disinterested description. I only mention this because a great deal of discussion which I have contributed to the article has been peremptorily deleted by other editors from time to time on the grounds that it should be in separate articles, though I never do this myself. Just a thought. Masalai 03:17, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I see that such an article has indeed been created and that the paragraphs in the Regina article simply copy its text. The policy is that main articles should only summarise material that is contained in sub-articles. I am removing the duplicated material and providing a link to the sub-article, in keeping with what has occurred with other sections in the main article. Masalai 04:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice photo of the library though. Please provide the information the bot demands, however, or it will be speedily deleted, which would be a pity. I assume you took the photo yourself? Masalai 04:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I note, incidentally, that the text of the Wikipedia article quotes extensively and verbatim from the RPL website. Although there are in-text URLs pointing to such website, it is likely that any of the various editors who maintain surveillance over articles on the lookout for plagiarism might well take issue with such quotation without quotation marks and footnoting and I suggest that you go over the text of the article to ensure that it is free of grounds for such accusation. Some such editors are entirely peremptory in simply deleting text they take issue with on that and other bases and it would be a pity for your effort simply to be wiped out. (This is not meant to be a threat: I am not such an editor; it is only an observation of what I have often seen happen and a suggestion that you might wish to forestall it.) Masalai 12:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

Ah, alas, it has been as I warned. I assume that the photo was yours. Can you restore it with Wikipedia-friendly tags as to its copyright status so it won't be deleted again? -- Masalai (talk) 18:30, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of photo

Dear Ms Witt – it does seem a pity that your admirable work on the sub-article on the Regina Public Library should be so peremptorily dismissed with the photo you provided being removed for want of copyright tags. Alas, that is the way of Wikipedia. Please do return to your article and restore the photo (or a substitute) with such copyright tags as will satisfy Wikipedia as to its belonging. It would seem a great pity if the article remained without a photo and the one you provided before was a very nice one. Masalai (talk) 12:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Sheikhs and desert love

A tag has been placed on Sheikhs and desert love, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. 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 {{hangon}} 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. iBen^discuss 01:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Sheikhs and desert love

A tag has been placed on Sheikhs and desert love 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 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. 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 web content. 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 {{hangon}} 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. Joe Chill (talk) 02:25, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:Centrallibrary2.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) 14:10, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]