User talk:Lord Manley

Itsmymarket.com

The problem here is that the site is well beneath notability standards for inclusion on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Notability (web). Using google, and looking for references to itsmymarket.com not from the itsmymarket.com domain, there are no hits. Using alexa.com, itsmymarket.com barely cracks the top 500,000 websites. Using news.google.com, there are no news articles about this website. I'm hard pressed to understand how this website is notable enough for inclusion here. I'm strongly inclined to deleting it again, but will give you the opportunity for reviewing Wikipedia:Notability (web) and showing me how itsmymarket.com meets or exceeds the standards listed there. All the best, --Durin 16:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Reading this I can't really justify it - there is a lot of media conversation in Cornwall (an Alexa ranking for a site which is still in one small area of South West England seems good to me?) but it is almost entirely non-web based. That is part of the nature of Cornwall.

I'm not a wikipedia person on the whole, but this site is something which a lot of people have been talking about down here and people are interested in it. I didn't realise that there were specific levels of interest before a subject was considered important enough for inclusion.

Got any advice? (You were pretty quick off the mark, mind - I hadn't even finished the info box when you deleted it!). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord Manley (talk • contribs)

• • Sorry if it seemed to quick for you. We receive a great many articles per day which are routinely deleted. Have a look at the deletion log. We've deleted more than 2500 pages today already. One of the problems we have is spam, with a number of companies trying very hard to get their name onto Wikipedia as Wikipedia is a very high profile site and having your name there is free advertising. We have to fight against that. That's party of the reason for the notability standards. Advice? Wait. If itsmymarket.com becomes notable enough to warrant an article, someone will eventually write one. We already have near 1.5 million articles. Believe in m:eventualism. Another admin has gone ahead and deleted the article. --Durin 19:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

okay. Cheers. I am a bit bemused - if things have to be well documented to be in Wikipedia then I wonder what it achieves, but I don't want to sound petulant, I'll have a read through the FAQs before I post again.

Orphaned fair use image (Image:OneMatchInfernoband.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:OneMatchInfernoband.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 20:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:One-match-inferno.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:One-match-inferno.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. Fritz S. (Talk) 18:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

April 2018

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that in this edit to Cattle, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:56, 11 April 2018 (UTC)