Imallout1

License tagging for Image:Seizethemomentepreissue.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Seizethemomentepreissue.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, 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:

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

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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding edits made to Scars Are Reminders (We Know The Killer) EP REISSUE

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Imallout1! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bpurevolume\.com\/, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 05:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Seizethemomentcurrentmyspacephoto.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Seizethemomentcurrentmyspacephoto.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, 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:

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

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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Seizethemoment1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Seizethemoment1.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, 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:

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

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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Seizethemomentcurrentmyspacephoto.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Seizethemomentcurrentmyspacephoto.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. -- SteinbDJ · talk · contributions 21:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Stmepreissuesarwktk.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Stmepreissuesarwktk.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, 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:

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

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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:10, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Scars Are Reminders (We Know The Killer) EP REISSUE, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you feel that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. —Pilotguy cleared for takeoff 13:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC) ==Removal of AfD notices — iridescenti (talk to me!) 22:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It would be appreciated if you would not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you.

AfD nomination of seizethemoment.

An editor has nominated seizethemoment., an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion////seizethemoment. and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 18:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the article [[1]]

Please do not violate Wikipedia policy by introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Adambro 20:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the deletion of [[2]]

Hi there Imallout1. I suspect it might be helpful for me to explain in more detail the reasoning behind the deletion of the article [[3]]. The article was deleted because it failed to assert the notability of the band. It is important that articles on Wikipedia comply with our notability criteria. The relevant document in this case is Wikipedia:Notability (music) which outlines what groups can be considered worthy of an article. The criteria for musicians and ensembles are:

“ A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, hip hop crew, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria:

1. It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable.¹
   • This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, and television documentaries² except for the following:
     • Media reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician/ensemble talks about themselves, and advertising for the musician/ensemble.
     • Works comprising merely trivial coverage, such as newspaper articles that simply report performance dates or the publications of contact and booking details in directories.
     • An article in a school or university newspaper (or similar) would generally be considered trivial but should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
2. Has had a charted hit on any national music chart.
3. Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country.
4. Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country,³ reported in reliable sources.⁴
5. Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).
6. Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such.
7. Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.
8. Has won a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno or Mercury award.
9. Has won or placed in a major music competition.
10. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that page.)
11. Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network.
12. Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio or TV network.

”

The article about ///seizethemoment. did not suggest that the band was notable in reference to these criteria. Could you let me know if the band satisfies any of these? Regards. Adambro 09:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

PS. I've copied the content of the article as it was when I deleted it to a temporary area of my userpage. It can be found at User:Adambro////seizethemoment.. Please don't edit this, I just think it might be helpful for the purposes of this discussion that we are both able to see the article. Adambro 09:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi again, I have acted to remove the protection from the page on the understanding that any future edits by yourself will address the guidelines and the concerns I have noted. The key is ensuring the article asserts in what way the band is notable, doing this will prevent it been speedy deleted again. Any user with concerns about the notability will have to go through a different process if they believe it should be deleted. An appropriate method would be to take it to Articles for deletion whereby consensus can be formed between editors through discussion as to whether the group merit an article. If I still have concerns myself once you have recreated the article, I will take it to Articles for deletion to ensure a more thorough discussion of the issue and to allow you to express your opinions. Regards. Adambro 10:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Seizethemoment

I have removed the {{db-repost}} tag from this after reading the talk above. However, at the moment this is a word-for-word recreation of the deleted article. If the article is not substantially improved to address the concerns raised in the AfD discussion, I'll re-tag it for deletion — iridescenti (talk to me!) 22:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

No.

The article has been deleted several times, and you keep re-creating it, and links to it, at many titles; this is now over the line into spamming and it has stopped because I have blocked you. It is patently obvious from the content that you are trying to use Wikipedia to launch this band's career, or perhaps in the mistaken belief that we are another MySpace. No. Guy (Help!) 21:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)