User talk:Saber.etc

Status of Wikipeida[edit]

As a writer who took on a project to write a biography of Jayne Pierson after she agreed that the article will only be factual and balanced I have fallen foul to the disgustingly complex and frustrating bureaucracy of Wikipedia. Administrators (I shall not mention names, but can be viewed on the "histroy" of edits section, have taken the arbitrary liberty of reverting edits, alleging no information, references, citations while its pretty obvious they didn't take a single minute out of their time to actually review the references and conclude if what was written was correct or not. I also firmly believe not a single one of them actually took the trouble to review the article properly.

The only reason people like us are asked to write article for others is because its simply too complicating and frustrating for the average person to post up a new article.

While it makes sense to give certain people the power to block edits and revert things posted on pages, these people should be held accountable and should prove they have read the article, gone through the references and say without any doubt that the article is bias, wrong , malicious, etc.

Not a single admin did this. Perhaps the sole power of being able to block things arbitrary got into their heads, and now they refuse to even review the works they delete.

Wikipedia had a spectacular rise, I'm sure with this sort of behaviour only two things are around the corner, radical reforms to simplify and hold to account these admins, or the downfall of Wiki..as only a reference tool and not something people would commit to contribute.

Perhaps that's all it was meant to be

saber.etc

July 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Triplestop x3 17:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by some search engines, including Google. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:41, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:49, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia and potentially penalized by search engines. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:17, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your email: You have been temporarily blocked for adding spam links. Please see the external link guideline. Since you are involved in the launching of the website, you have a conflict of interest and should not be adding the links. You may request that another admin review my block by following the instructions in the block message above. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:45, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Jayne Pierson.jpg[edit]

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Jayne Pierson.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 CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see 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 here.

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 Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

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 uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:13, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File Permission[edit]

You may call thias copyright clearance and the need for neutral language and proper sourcing a nuisance but it is essential that Wikipedia reamins within the law. If you have forwarded the email to permissions-enwikimedia.org then you should get a response which will then authorise uploading the file. If you need help with that please ask. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:14, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi There are no admins "in charge". Admins are there to carry out a small set of limite functions. Most tagging of artciles is done by ordinary editors. This is a collaraborative project. The image was removed because it was not correctly licensend.Jezhotwells (talk) 17:15, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]