Mhancoc7

Image copyright problem with Image:Screenshot.png

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Screenshot.png. 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 03:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ubuntu Christian Edition (2nd nomination)

if you disagree with a closure, please take it to WP:DRV instead of commenting on a closed AfD. --D_arkF_alls ^talk 06:58, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I notice you are a developer for this project. Thanks for supporting the open source movement with your time. I'm speaking to you from the operating system Gentoo Linux! While developement of new Linux distros is a great thing, promotion of one to this extent really makes the open source movement look bad. There are better ways to go about promoting a distro. Have you gotten it listed at http://distrowatch.com yet? When there are enough people using the distro, its time for a wikipedia article, not a moment before. Please see our policies on promotion. Please try to promote open source in a way that is better then some PR agent for a commercial company. Please see out guidelines on conflict of interest as well. In short, when its time for your distro to have an article, others not associated with the development will do it. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 07:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your input. This is not an attempt to promote the distro. Ubuntu CE is currently #31 on the Distrowatch popularity rating. It is down a bit from #25. It was in the top 25 almost since its initial release over a year ago. Ubuntu CE has a loyal and growing user base and has gained sufficient notability to warrant a page on Wikipedia. I should note that I did not create the initial Wikipedia entry.--Mhancoc7 09:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with the number of users and everything to do with the number of available reliable sources. A DRV may very well be warranted, on those grounds. Many sources were available and listed, but, per my notes on the talk page, a rewrite might be a more appropriate avenue. Again, though, so many of the apps are shared between it and the Muslim fork, the other Christian build, etc that it would make a lot of sense to deal with all of them in the same context. That said, to avoid COI issues, it would probably result in a more neutral piece if you didn't take an active role in the rewrite. From the COI's summary: "Editors are strongly advised not to edit articles where they have a close personal or business connection, except for certain non-controversial edits. For more substantial edits, COI affected editors may use the talk page to request help from neutral editors." MrZaius^talk 09:08, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I did try to not edit the entry in the past. I only added the list of reviews because I was afraid that it was going to be deleted. My main issue is that there seems to be an inconsistency with regards to which of the "unofficial" Ubuntu distros should have their own page. It seems to me that it should be all or none. I am still a bit shocked that Ubuntu CE does not have the "notability" needed when it has been reviewed, published, and discussed immensely. It is also the first of the Christian or religious distros to get any serious attention in the Linux world. To me that in itself is enough to warrant its own page.

Image copyright problem with Image:Ubuntu CE logo only.png

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Ubuntu CE logo only.png. 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 12:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment moved from userpage

Please use the discussion page for discussion relating to edits. (regarding the ubuntu distro list) :) --Curuxz 21:01, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Moved from userpage Giles Bennett ^{(Talk, Contribs)} 21:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry did not mean to post in the wrong place. Apologies Mhancoc7 I thought I was posting here not on your front page. My bad. --Curuxz 21:05, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I am sorry for posting the comment on the distro list as well. I am just very upset by the actions of Wikipedia concerning my projects Wikipedia entry. It can be difficult to navigate through the somewhat cumbersome Wikipedia architecture to try and discuss things. I feel like it should be very easy for those finding info on Wikipedia for the first time to be able to see that there is a discussion ongoing. --Mhancoc7 21:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

File:My.php?image=screenshot1rs1.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:My.php?image=screenshot1rs1.png, 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. —Bkell (talk) 12:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)