| Revision as of 01:15, 2 November 2007 editYilloslime (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers10,467 edits →Your edits....: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:50, 2 November 2007 edit undoHal Raglan (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers7,993 edits →Your edits....Next edit → | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
| I suggest reading up on what wikipedia is and is not and consider changing your editing style accordingly. The articles I've linked above would be a good place to start. ] ] 01:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC) | I suggest reading up on what wikipedia is and is not and consider changing your editing style accordingly. The articles I've linked above would be a good place to start. ] ] 01:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :I have removed your most recent addition(s) to the ''Reid-Limbaugh letter controversy article'', for two reasons. First, the lengthy quote you inserted is not properly cited. The '']'' article that is linked contains no such quote; please familiar yourself with wikipedia's ] policy. In addition, you've included editorial opinions slamming Reid in a strident, biased tone completely unsuitable for an encyclopedia. Please familiar yourself with wikipedia's ] policy before continuing to edit on wikipedia.-] 04:50, 2 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:50, 2 November 2007
License tagging for Image:FoveanCover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:FoveanCover.jpg. Misplaced Pages gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, 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 Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 05:07, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Don't copyvio
Please be more careful with your contributions. The last paragraph of this edit of yours was a copyright violation of the LA Times article you were citing. You either have to directly quote (as you did in the paragraph before) or write in your own words. As an author yourself, you should understand. Wasted Time R 03:47, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
P.S. The material was cleaned up and relocated to Hillary_Rodham_Clinton_presidential_campaign,_2008#Other_irregularities, where it belongs for now. If this turns out to be a story with legs, it can go into the main article.
Your edits....
I'm not going to revert your most recent reverts of Reid-Limabugh Letter and Hillary Clinton. I'm going to let someone else do that, and hopefully you'll see that your edits go against consensus. And hopefully someone will explain why they violate WP:NPOV, WP:WEIGHT, etc. If no one explains this, maybe I'll take it up, but I don't have time to right now. Maybe you could save everyone a little time by reading these policies yourself, and then reconsider your edits.
I also suggest reading wikipedia's guideline on conflicts of interest, as your editing of Fovean chronicles appears to run afoul of it. Also on the topic of Fovean chronicles, note that it does not appear to meet wikipedia's notability standards for books, and unless the article is improved to demonstrated the notability of the books, then it is liable to be nominated for deletion. Finally, your username might be inappropriate: "Usernames that match the name of a company or group, especially if the user promotes it" are considered inappriate.
I suggest reading up on what wikipedia is and is not and consider changing your editing style accordingly. The articles I've linked above would be a good place to start. Yilloslime (t) 01:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed your most recent addition(s) to the Reid-Limbaugh letter controversy article, for two reasons. First, the lengthy quote you inserted is not properly cited. The Boston Globe article that is linked contains no such quote; please familiar yourself with wikipedia's verifiability policy. In addition, you've included editorial opinions slamming Reid in a strident, biased tone completely unsuitable for an encyclopedia. Please familiar yourself with wikipedia's NPOV policy before continuing to edit on wikipedia.-Hal Raglan 04:50, 2 November 2007 (UTC)