User talk:Caiusteve

AfD nomination of Fishburn United Methodist Church

I have nominated Fishburn United Methodist Church, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fishburn United Methodist Church. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Mr Senseless (talk) 14:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Fishburn United Methodist Church

A tag has been placed on Fishburn United Methodist Church requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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 (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, 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, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Mr Senseless (talk) 14:40, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. Since you blanked the article,it has been deleted, but I wanted to advise you that copyright concerns are not an issue in this case as long as you provide a direct link to the source. The page in question released the information per GFDL, which is the same license Wikipedia uses. The larger concern you face is establishing notability. Without that, this article is likely to be deleted even though it is not a copyright violation. I'd like to direct you to the guidelines on notability for commercial and non-commercial entities. Please verify notability with reliable secondary sources. Information from the church's website can certainly be used to substantiate information, but can't be used to establish notability. If you have questions about any of this, please feel free to ask me at my talk page or to ask at the help desk. You can also type your question here and paste {{helpme}} above it, and a volunteer will come to you. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)