User talk:Zodiac01

License tagging for Image:DSC00051Lamp.JPG[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:DSC00051Lamp.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. 10:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

vanity[edit]

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

A tag has been placed on D'Andre Devon Lampkin requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: 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 you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and providing your reasons for contesting on the article's talk page, 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. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

You may want to read the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. Have you read WP:AUTO? -- RHaworth 10:14, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:100 0027.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:100 0027.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. 20:04, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Excalibur09.gif[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Excalibur09.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --OrphanBot 06:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

USS Amazon (Star Trek PbBB)[edit]

I have replaced the speedy tag that was on this article. I've got nothing against the article, just they shouldn't be removed by the articles author. A^RendedWinter 08:21, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only followed instructions by replacing the tag with <hangon>> Zodiac01 16:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

USS Amazon (Star Trek PbBB)[edit]

In response to your note on the article's talk page, internet forums are covered by the notability guideline on web material (Wikipedia:Notability (web)), which indicates that notability is satisfied by one of the following (in short form; see the guideline for full text):

Multiple, non-trivial coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject,
The endowment on the subject of a well-known and independent award,
Distribution by a respected, independent medium, excluding hosting on sites such as GeoCities or in personal blogs.

Currently, the article lacks any assertion of notability by the above guideline and hence has been speedily deleted. If you are able to expand the article to support notability, please feel free to drop me a note on my talk page, and I will userfy the material for you so that you may do so and restore the article when it is compliant with guidelines. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:21, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just read the guidelines on reliable source. "1) the piece of work that is being cited, 2) the creator of the work (the author or artist), and 3) the publisher or location where it is to be found (a website, book, album or painting)."

The references listed all the sites related to the work: [1] [2]

How is it that Star Trek Simulation Forum|Star Trek Simulation Forum is able to stay on wikipedia?Zodiac01 17:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) In response to your note at my talk page, as I explained above, the notability guidelines for web material have clear requirements. Your removal of the speedy deletion tag did not figure into this evaluation, although I believe you have misread the instructions. {{hangon}} is placed beneath the speedy notice; it does not replace it. As far as your comparison to another article is concerned, articles are evaluated independently. While meant for use in articles for deletion discussions, the essay Articles to Avoid in Deletion Discussions explains why. However, in specific, the article you listed for comparisons claims official support, while yours did not. It does not have a strong assertion of notability, but it has something and hence would not be a good candidate for WP:CSD. USS Amazon (Star Trek PbBB) failed to meet the guidelines in any way. Again, if you can assert notability by following the steps above, I will be happy to userfy the material for you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been userfied at User:Zodiac01/trek. I suggest that you review the policies not only on website content, but also on verifiability and reliable sourcing. While you are right about how material is cited, you may have missed the definition of a reliable source, which in essence states "Reliable publications are those with an established structure for fact-checking and editorial oversight". That guideline and the one on verifiability (linked above) contains more information on how to identify sources that Wikipedia finds acceptable in establishing notability.

With regards to Star Trek Simulation Forum and the speedy-deletion policy, articles are speedily deleted by criterion A7 if they do not make an assertion of notability. That article indicates that "In October 2002, STSF became the simming organization recognized and approved by the official Star Trek website, www.startrek.com. It remains the only forum to hold such standing since Paramount Pictures discontinued its sponsorship of Star Trek: A Call To Duty in 2000 after discontinuing service contracts with MSN". It slimly supports the assertion through a link to the official website. It's quite possible that if this assertion of notability were examined in a deletion debate, it would not stand up, and the article would be deleted. You should be careful in using other articles as a base for your own, since you can be misled in this way. If you wish to establish an article on Wikipedia, you'll need to document notability on its own and not by comparison to any other article. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<reset indent>I believe the biggest challenge you are likely to face in establishing this article is locating the kind of sources that will verify notability. Forums of this sort may attract a large following without getting the kind of coverage that Wikipedia looks for. If your forum has been covered in newspapers or magazines, for instance, those sorts of references are valuable in establishing notability. If you can establish notability from other sources, then you can use material from your own website to fill out the details of your article. It may be that a different Wiki would be a better host to this information. I'm not familiar with startrekwiki (and you probably are), but I wonder if their guidelines would be more to your purposes. There may be gaming wikis that would be suitable hosts for your material as well. There's this one, for instance. Please note that I'm not saying that you won't be able to establish notability for Wikipedia inclusion. I offer up some other ideas in case you can't. If you find sourcing, I would be happy to give you my opinion on whether or not it meets policies. You can also ask at the help desk.

As one further thought, you might be able to get advice on developing this from editors experienced at working on articles in gaming genres. You could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Role-playing games. (Remember to sign your post with ~~~~.) They may have ideas of where to look for proper sourcing and how to structure your article. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This time, I have responded at my own talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Excalibur09.gif)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Excalibur09.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 17:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Justice4janitors.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Justice4janitors.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:34, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]