User talk:Thoughtcrime69er
Copyright problem: Reverend George Loeb
Hello, and
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under allowance license, then you should do one of the following:
- If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Reverend George Loeb and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Reverend George Loeb, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permissionfor instructions.
- If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Reverend George Loebwith a link to where we can find that note.
- If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Reverend George Loeb. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materialsfor instructions.
- If you have permission from the author to release the text under the
It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Reverend George Loeb saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! ClovisPt (talk) 00:18, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Possibly unfree File:GeorgeLoeb.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GeorgeLoeb.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia: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 the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --ARTEST4ECHO (talk|contribs) 21:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
File permission problem with File:MattHalePME.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:MattHalePME.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on
Creativity Alliance
You currently appear to be engaged in an
In particular the three-revert rule states that:
- Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
- Editors violating the rule will usually be blocked for 24 hours for a first incident.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording, and content that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
Please discuss the issue on the talkpage. This wholesale section blanking without comment is both disruptive and unhelpful. Glaucus (talk) 19:38, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
ANI discussion
See
I have blocked both this account and KarlKraft (talk · contribs) indefinitely – this one for the legal threat, both of them for long-term patterns of disruptive COI editing, fighting out their internal factional strife between racist splinter groups on Wikipedia. We don't need either of these people here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)