User talk:PTW16

Your recent article creations have been blatant cut & paste copyright violations. Please do not post copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. See Wikipedia:Copyrights. Copyright violations are unacceptable and persistent violators will be blocked. Your original contributions are welcome. -- Scientizzle 18:16, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Seriously! Quit making articles that are copyright violations...please check out the Wikipedia policies at Wikipedia:Copyrights before continuing! I have tagged Kevin Higgins for delete. -- Scientizzle 18:27, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If that's true you need to make clear that you have complete rights the the content on the talk page. There's no way for anyone to know if you just cut & paste from websites.

Copyright law can be very complex--for example, your article on Ed Conroy was a cut and paste from this site, which has "Copyright © 2006, CSTV Networks, Inc. and The Citadel." One would need to secure permission from CSTV Networks, Inc. and The Citadel to lawfully post this content since there is no author byline (as I understand...). You might check out Wikipedia:Copyright FAQ and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ (especially here).

That said, I don't want to discourage you from editing or adding content, just do it within the bounds of the (confusing at times) copright rules. -- Scientizzle 18:48, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you're the author of http://www.uscphisigs.com/?page_id=2 , could you put a note on that page indicating you license it under GFDL? That would resolve the coyright problem. Conscious 11:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Richard Cunningham, Jr.

A tag has been placed on Richard Cunningham, Jr. 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 about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ironholds (talk) 22:13, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of American South Conference

You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

The article American South Conference has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done because the article, which appeared to be about a real person, individual animal, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, did not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the notability of the subject may be deleted at any time. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources.

Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and for specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for musicians, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 21:09, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Several things stand in the way of this article's revival. It was deleted under WP:CSD#A7, meaning the article did not indicate why it was notable. A collegiate athletic conference that lasts a mere six years might not be notable, and since there was only one reference provided, there was no other means to prove notability. It is obvious that it existed, and should be mentioned in the Sun Belt Conference article, but without more substantive information, it just doesn't have the weight needed. The Sun Belt Conference is 34 years old, and the Southwest Conference lasted 82 years. Those time periods are indicative of something more significant. Were there other conferences that we don't know about? Should all of them get their own article? Perhaps. If there was a bit of substance to add. But a single reference is never enough to support an article's inclusion into Wikipedia. The general notability guidelines require two or more independent, third-party, verifiable and reliable sources that discuss the subject in a non-trivial way. Without that, there is no article. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 11:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject LA Tech

How bout them Dawgs! As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Louisiana Tech, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Louisiana Tech University. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks and GO DAWGS! AllisonFoley (talk) 06:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]