User talk:MrSimmonds

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Marty-Rathbun-Arrest.jpg[edit]

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Marty-Rathbun-Arrest.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. 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. 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 specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 01:46, 22 July 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 01:46, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Marty-Rathbun-Arrest.jpg[edit]

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Cirt (talk) 02:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notice regarding Arbitration Enforcement[edit]

Please see WP:AE. Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 02:11, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Policy reminder[edit]

Hi there. It appears that in recent days you have made a couple of edits that violate Wikipedia's content policies. In particular, Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons requires that sources in such articles be reliable, particularly when the information added is negative. Blogs, particularly attack blogs like this one, do not meet this standard.

Your other problematic edit was the uploading of this image. Again, it was sourced to an unreliable site, in addition to which police mugshots are generally considered inappropriate, per this.

I encourage you to familiarize yourself with some of our more important policies, such as WP:BLP, WP:V, WP:RS and WP:NPOV. Thanks for your time. Gatoclass (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass, who decides what is inappropriate? Or who is WP:NPF? MrSimmonds (talk) 23:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notice regarding prior Scientology arbitration case[edit]

WP:ARBSCI

Please be aware of the arbitration case at the above link. Please read through the remedies, especially with regards to:

as well as other applicable relevant remedies. Thank you for your time. -- Cirt (talk) 19:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked indefinitely[edit]

Based on checkuser evidence indicating this is an alternative account, I've blocked indefinitely. PhilKnight (talk) 20:03, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]