ChrisCharles

2

Image copyright problem with File:Wareham museum ext.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Wareham museum ext.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 22:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Smooth and Cut Naturists

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Smooth and Cut Naturists, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

The article doesn't indicate any notability for its subject, and I can find no news or academic references.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Gonzonoir (talk) 17:53, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Smooth and Cut Naturists

I have nominated Smooth and Cut Naturists, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smooth and Cut Naturists. 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 23:06, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I placed the following on the discussion / talk page: This is to answer the verification request about this new page created called Smooth and Cut Naturists. SCN is well known in the UK as a genuine naturist [nudist] website. The SCN Club featured in many editions of the UK publication Health & Efficiency over the past decade and a review of the website was recently featured in the same publication. Google UK has "SCN" and Smooth and Cut" at the top of their listings and our website has now accumulated in excess of three and a half million hits. The American Association for Nude Recreation (AANR) library has a complete set of our publications called Ultimate Nudity. I hope this is enough to prove the validity of an entry for Smooth and Cut Naturists.

License tagging for File:Scn logo new 03.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Scn logo new 03.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 00:05, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Scn logo new 03.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Scn logo new 03.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Cloudbound (talk) 23:02, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Royal Navy Cordite Factory, Holton Heath

Hi ChrisCharles. Your latest edits about the DVD are of personal interest to me, and I'll will be seeking to get a copy in the new year (and I've think that I've met John a long long time ago). However, that new material is very likely to be regarded as WP:SPAM, so unless it is made compliant its likely to be removed from the article and as a consequence Spam notices may well be appearing on your talkpage. Pyrotec (talk) 21:52, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect Deletion of Sentence Submitted to the Apostrophe Protection Society Entry

Today at 14:26 GMT I added a short sentence to the end of the Apostrophe Protection Society entry explaining that there had been a change of ownership of the society as from yesterday (2022-02-05). My sentence explaining this has been deleted by your editor (Revirvlkodlaku) with the note: “Removed unsourced claim”. Please reinstate.

I am the outgoing owner of apostrophe.org.uk and handed it over to Bob McCalden yesterday, 2022-02-05. Proof of his ownership can be found at: https://www.apostrophe.org.uk/about The sentence to be reinstated is “The ownership of the Apostrophe Protection Society and its website transferred to Bob McCalden on 5 February 2022”.

The APS is an ongoing group, so the references to “Former organisation” in the article should also be amended.

Chris (talk) 21:57, 6 February 2022 (UTC)