User talk:Kilbarry1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have asked the people responsible for the website to confirm that I am the author of the original article on Nora Wall.

Kilbarry1 (talk) 17:34, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Kilbarry1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like "Nora Wall", may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! NeutralHomer • Talk • 10:55, 23 August 2009 (UTC) 10:55, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of "Nora Wall"[edit]

A tag has been placed on "Nora Wall" 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.

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. NeutralHomer • Talk • 10:55, 23 August 2009 (UTC) 10:55, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with "Nora Wall"[edit]

Hello. Concerning your contribution, "Nora Wall", 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 http://www.alliancesupport.org/news/archives/000969.html. As a copyright violation, "Nora Wall" appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. "Nora Wall" 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:

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. Favonian (talk) 11:20, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of "Nora Wall"[edit]

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as "Nora Wall", to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

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. RP459 (talk) 23:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Kilbarry1. You have new messages at SchuminWeb's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


advice[edit]

Please read WP:NPOV , WP:SOAPBOX, & WP:BLP and try to turn N.W. into an acceptable article. The BLP policy applies to everyone mentioned in the article. I have no doubt that the facts are as stated, and possibly the opinions are correct, but our purpose is not to editorialize in such a manner. Do not include details of the biography of other people. Do not give opinions. What is suitable for an outside web site is not generally suitable for an encyclopedia. A good start would be to remove all or almost all the adjectives, and every one of the exclamation marks. Describe events in chronological order. Describe the accusations first, then the trial, then the appeals, , then subsequent comments--in that order. I started, now you do the rest. I'll check in a day or two, and if necessary do the cutting myself, with the help of the other uninvolved people who have been trying to restore a sense of NPOV and proportion to this article DGG ( talk ) 02:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gotta echo DGG here. Don't quote. Summarize. Be concise. Don't put in lengthy blocks of statements when a sentence or two would suffice. Don't quote at length from the judgment - summarize what it said. Even considering the extra size caused by the cites and wikification, I see no reason for the article to triple the original length. And don't use "criticism" sections. Work them into the article as necessary. Tim Song (talk) 04:13, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is one final section that I need insert! - about arrest and interrogation of the 2 accused. Then I will try to summarise. However the Judgement of the Court of Criminal Appeal on 1 December 2005 is the key to the whole article and it may not be a good idea to over-summarise it. I will cut down on extended quotes e.g. from Kevin Myers and rework 'criticism' section. I see that the Paul Shanley case came before the Massacheutetts Supreme Court today. He is a very different charcacter to Nora Wall but if his appeal succeeds, it could be the end of Retrieved Memory in the USA. Kilbarry1 (talk) 22:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I pretty much share your opinion about Retrieved Memory, but Wikipedia is not a soapbox. (anyway, I don't think this was retrieved memory , but downright fraud--You might be interested in Josephine Tey's novel, The Franchise Affair. The situation is clear enough --and much more effective -- when presented briefly DGG ( talk ) 06:30, 12 September 2009 (UTC) .[reply]

Permissions letter[edit]

I am very sorry for the unreasonable delay in handling your correspondence to the communications committee. Evidently, the agent originally handling your mail was unable to respond. I have written a response to the people responsible for the website to request clarification of their release, which will hopefully result in the swift resolution of this issue. Meanwhile, the portion of the article where duplication of that site begins has been blanked. I do apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you and ask you, please, to be patient. The process, which usually works much more quickly than this, is in place to protect not only Wikipedia, but also copyright holders like yourself. I will be keeping an eye on my inbox, as future correspondence on this matter will be directed to me, and I will restore that text as soon as the release is clarified. I have copied you in my correspondence.

If you wish to speak to me on Wikipedia, please refer to me by the name of Moonriddengirl. For security reasons, I am uncomfortable connecting my Wikipedia work with my off-Wikipedia identity. I will be watching your talk page in case you'd like to discuss this further here.

Again, I'm sorry that you have had to wait so long for a response. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:15, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited John Charles McQuaid, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Horgan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 14:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kilbarry1&oldid=692228854"