Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Welcome!
Hello, Alexsoddy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:38, 5 December 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading File:Andhra Chillies.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.
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading File:Andhra Curries.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.
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
While many news article information often do end up cited on Wikipedia, they do not all deserve their own separate wikipedia pages. I have redirected your new stub to the proper location of such information on wikipedia. News articles like the one you created belongs on WikiNews. ηoian‡orever ηew ‡rontiers07:35, 25 December 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I have nominated GVMC Dutch Bungalow, 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/GVMC Dutch Bungalow. 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.
Tedder,
I didnt get enough time to prove its notability.
Please undelete the article and move it to a special page. ( where I can refine the article and have a discussion before moving it to the article space )
I understand that only an administrator can access the deleted content. ( which is why I request you to do this )
If its not possible please post the deleted content on my talk page.
I also plan to use a paranthesis instead of the prefix GVMC.
Sasank Sleeper (talk) 17:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Diane James. I do not think that Diane James fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because There was some promotional tone to the articel as written, but that can be cured by normal editing. When an article on a well sourced and pretty clearly notable person (or subject) seems overly promotional, rewriting or tagging for rewrite is in my view usually better than speedy deletion. I request that you consider not re-tagging Diane James for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page.DES(talk)23:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Perhaps, but not if the statements made are supported by the sources. it does need editing to remove a promotional tone, and i have done some of that already. I have removed the "fansite" tag which the current stage does not support. If you really think that the substance (as opposed to the tone) of the article is biased, it would be a good idea to use the talk page to indicate content that you think should be added or removed. DES(talk)23:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Just wanted to make a general point that you might want to be a bit more careful with your tagging of newly created articles, though of course your work on new pages patrol is appreciated. I first came across the tag you added here which was pretty severely flawed in at least two respects: 1) The article was clearly not a hoax (basic googling would have determined that, or reading the article about the article subject's predecessor as president); 2) The article was obviously not a BLP since it pointed out that August died in 1913. There also are not really neutrality issues, just sourcing ones, and all of this would have been fairly easy to determine with a small bit of Wiki and Google searching.
You also tagged John Eisenmann for speedy deletion which was somewhat understandable since it was only one sentence at the time, however a quick check of the history would have shown that the article creator is a veteran contributor, and tagging a new article just 18 minutes after its creation was thus probably premature. I understand the need to patrol new pages quickly and to get nonsense articles that don't belong here deleted, but taking an extra 30 seconds to see who created the article and their level of experience with Wikipedia is often a good idea since it could save some time in the end. Anyhow, just a suggestion to maybe slow down a bit when you are tagging articles and make sure you look fully into the situation. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs23:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Bigtimepeace is a lot nicer than I am. That tag on John Eisenmann, that's shooting from the hip by a new editor who doesn't recognize a veteran editor when he runs into one--even the simplest of Google searches proves notability: this is the very first hit. Sorry, but you are going to have to be a lot more careful and think before you act, lest the useful work you want to do is perceived as just disruptive. Drmies (talk) 00:55, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Blackwing Dragon. I do not think that Blackwing Dragon fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because The context was there in the article: "Yu-Gi-Oh!". Context does not require a link nor a citation, it only requires the information with with an interested user could find more info with which to expand or interpret an article, perhaps using Google or a Wikipedia search.. I request that you consider not re-tagging Blackwing Dragon for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page.DES(talk)23:45, 14 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
this edit shows that the context was there when you added the tag. It wasn't linked, bit just typing the term into the Wikipedia search bar reveals the relevant page. Please be more careful in tagging for speedy deletion. DES(talk)23:45, 14 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
You tell me that my action was unwarranted and immediately tag it for deletion yourself. The reason maynot have been right. But is that reason for reprimanding ? Sasank Sleeper (talk) 00:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
There is a world of difference between prodding an article, which is what DESiegel did, and putting it up for speedy deletion, which is what you did. You should have a firm understanding of that distinction, and of the distinction between those and WP:AFD, if you are going to be tagging articles for deletion while on new pages patrol. It might be a good idea for you take a break from this type of work for right now and read up on our deletion policies, which can take awhile. And with respect to your last statement, it is indeed important to provide the correct rationale for speedy deleting an article. A1, A3, and A7 speedy deletion candidates are simply not the same thing and the appropriate tag should be used. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs00:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Indeed. A proposed deletion gives anyone interested a week at least to find the article and to deal with the issues involved, whether by editing, merging, or arguing that deletion is unwarranted. Speedy deletion can be over and gone in minutes.
Beyond this it is, as Bigtimepeace says, important to have accurate stated deletion reasons and tags. They tell editors (some of whom may be relative novices) what issues need to be fixed (if possible) to avoid deletion, and what problems to avoid in future. They also tell admins patrolling speedy deletes what problems to look at. Also, the stated reason in the tag tends to remain in the deletion log (if the article is deleted) and may be the only thing someone looking at the matter later has to go on. it is thus important to get them right. Moreover, getting the tag right increases confidence that the tagger looked at, carefully considered and sensibly evaluated the page. There can be legitimate differences of opinion as to which if any deletion tag should be used on a given page. Newpage patrol is of great value, and I thank you for doing it. i did not intend my comments above to be seen as a reprimand, but as a courtesy notice to you that i had disagreed with your action and why, and as helpful advice on dealing with such pages in future. I am sorry if they seemed overly harsh. DES(talk)00:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
You're welcome. Manual indeed. Is there another way? There is a number missing a digit in annual production. Maybe you can fix it as I don't understand what it should be. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I appreciate you letting me know that guy was still at it with his ridiculously spammy article. If you ever feel like patrolling pages where speedy deletion tags have been removed (which I do), you can do so here. When you see a page where the speedy tag was removed by the author, or an IP address with no edits except to that page (i.e., he logged out to edit "anonymously"), just put it back and issue a warning template from Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace, starting at level one and moving up. (Just make sure that it wasn't a speedy deletion tag for, e.g., no content, that the author removed when he added content.) Thanks! Glenfarclas (talk) 10:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion
Also what exactly is the point of User:Sleeper, which came to my attention when I saw this edit? That is, why is your user page name "Sleeper" and your user talk page name "Alexsoddy"? Seems highly confusing and probably against policy. Are you trying to change your username? --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs21:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
User:Sleeper is my alias. I redirect my home page to User:Sleeper. But I erringly redirected the talk page of Sleeper to Alexsoddy. It should have been the other way round. Sasank Sleeper (talk) 22:10, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure if the "alias" bit is okay or not but you should find out, and in any case your user and user talk pages should definitely have the same name. You'll need to get some help from someone who knows more about username/userpage policy than I do, but it's a minor issue compared with my first point above, and that's something you need to respond to. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs22:30, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Mr. Bigtimepeace,
When was it that you advised me to slow down ?
At 00:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC) in your comment "It might be a good idea for you take a break from this type of work for right now and read up on our deletion policies, which can take awhile."Reply
Why did I receive the note on problematic tagging of Paratene McLeod ?
Because I expressed a doubt about the notability of the person in question.
An admin(i think) was satisfied with his notability and reverted my edit.
FYI, that edit was at 22:32, 14 January 2010. This was clearly not after your advise.
Why did I receive the note on problematic tagging of Biscuit(bread) ?
Because at that time, the article was clearly a copy of Biscuit. So according to CSD A10, I requested a speedy delete. I was clearly within the rules. Even User:DESiegel proposed a merge to the article that it was a copy of.
As for the Guntur Sannam entry, it was a commendation and not a reprimand.
The 'Thanks' entry was a pat on my back for drawing attention to a serial violator.
Why did I receive the note on problematic tagging of The Same ?
This edit was done way before your 00:24, 15 January 2010 advise.
If your (unexpressed) point is that you have indeed slowed down and are making sure you understand deletion and tagging policies then that is good. I was assuming (wrongly) that the problematic tagging of "The Same" happened after my first note since it was a recent message, which is why I commented again. Like I said if you are going to be more careful about these matters (you had not said so previously) then no worries, but also there's no need to yell at someone with bolded words, it does not really help your case. And do please talk to someone about your user and user talk pages. Finally I've changed back the title of this thread to what I wrote initially. You're welcome to remove my comments, but please do not edit them. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs23:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Many people, both here and elsewhere on the internet, do consider writing in ALL CAPS or boldface the equivalent of yelling. I think it is usually best avoided on wiki talk pages except when there is a particular reason for it, as there sometimes is. DES(talk)00:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
When people see a troublesome tag (one such people think is troublesome) they tend to notify the editor who placed the tag of there concerns. This is not to be seen as a reprimand, but as a notification that another editor disagrees, and as advice to reconsider. If several different editors are questioning a number of tags, it adds point to the suggestion to reconsider or slow down. People placing such notices on talk pages may not look into the exact sequence of tagging and past advice. DES(talk)00:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion
Wikipedia:Sock puppetry says: "The default position on Wikipedia is that editors who register should edit using one account only." However that page goes on to list several legitimate uses of multiple accounts. Wikipedia:Username policy says: "It is recommended that contributors do not use multiple accounts without good reason." I suggest that if you are going to do this, you include a clear notice about it on your active user page (and perhaps also at the head of your user talk page), and that your active user page and user talk page should be at the same name. But I don't think what you are doing with your "alias" is against any policy exactly, but it may be confusing to others and thereby seem "disruptive" to some. DES(talk)23:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
As an admin I do have delete privileges. The usual way to request a user page be deleted is with {{db-user}}, but I will take this talk page msg as the equivalent. DES(talk)23:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Since there is page history by users other than you, simply deleting it would be against policy. i have restored it to the redirect and protected it so that won't be changed. I trust that is acceptable to you? DES(talk)23:57, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Oops, I didn't read your previous message as carefully as I should have. I can move User talk:Alexsoddy over User talk:Sleeper if you prefer, but the early history of User talk:Sleeper will be preserved. If you would prefer that, let me know and i will do it. Once done it would be very tricky and tedious to undo (and undoing would require an admin), so i won't do it unless you say that you want me to. DES(talk)00:04, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
It is not a huge issue, but it is usual on talk pages to indent successive contributions to help make the different people's comments more clearly separate. This is doen by placing one or more colors at the start of each paragaph, one colon for each level of indent. Ther are several examples on this talk page. See WP:Talk page#Indentation for more details.
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
In this edit you added an {{expert}} tag to FrontlineSMS. That tag urges readers to "See the talk page for details.". But although you have posted to Talk:FrontlineSMS, you have not yet indicated what expert attention is needed there. When placing an expert (or better an expert-subject) tag it is pretty much always a good idea to place a note on the talk page indicating what expert assistance is wanted.
In this earlier edit you placed an {{article issues}} tag on the same article, with parameters "advert, context, notability, npov and unencyclopedic".
Advert might be debated -- at least one other editor seems to agree with you.
Context i disagree with. The start of the article as it was when you tagged it read: "FrontlineSMS is a free piece of software that turns a laptop computer and a mobile phone into a two-way group-messaging hub..." and the next sentence read "Once installed, the program enables users to send and receive text messages (SMS) with groups of people through mobile phones." I think that should make it quite clear to most readers what the article was about.
Notability might be arguable, but four cited references, three to the BBC, seem pretty good for an article about software to me.
Npov here is pretty much redundant with advert, for good or ill.
Unencyclopedic here is I think pretty much redundant with notability.
I think you might want to reconsider placing similar tags in future. Or more exactly, you might want to more closely look at articles to see if the tags you are about to use really apply to the article at hand. I know this tagging was done yesterday before some of the discussion here, buit it is a case you might want to look back at and see if you would do the same again or not. DES(talk)00:56, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Others' comments says "On your own user talk page, you may archive threads at your discretion. Simple deleting others' comments on your talk page is not forbidden by policy, but is discouraged. It is also rather pointless. Many new users believe they can hide critical comments by deleting them. This is not true. Such comments can always be retrieved from the page history." I urge you to heed this advice. If you just want to keep your talk page clean of sections you have read and feel no need to respond to, I urge you to archive them or arrange for a bot to archive them for you. See Help:Archiving a talk page for details on this procedure. Simply deleting sections may make it look as if you want to hide possibly critical comments. This may harm your reputation. If you do delete sections, others are free to assume that you have read them first. DES(talk)01:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
In this edit you added an [[tl|article issues}} tag to San Antonio City Council with "parameters npov, one source and primarysources". i don't see any NPOV issues here, and have removed that parameter from the tag. What part of the article as it stands do you think is biased or non-neutral? It looks like a purely factual description to me. Also in this kind of plain factual article, almost a directory entry, when the primary source is an official governmental source (and thus quite reliable, at least for this kind of data) I in general would worry much about a "primary sources" tag. WP:RS says "Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves". Indeed i might argue that a municipal body's official web site is not a primary source as regards that governmental entity. it surely tends to have review processes in place as strong as most secondary sources do, and so IMO should be equally usable. DES(talk)01:34, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
If you are going to use semi-automated tagging tools you should consider rechecking the result after you click save. Remember that you are as responsible for the result as if you had hand-typed it. DES(talk)01:49, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
When you use the generic {{stub}} tag you put artilces into Category:Stubs. as this category says:
Please put any stub-sized articles into an appropriate stub category. If possible, stubs should have a stub tag for a specific topic instead of a generic stub tag, such as using the {{art-stub}} tag or one of its subtypes for art-related stubs. Ideally, this category should be empty or close to empty.
See Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types for a complete listing in an organized catalogue of topics. Several tools are available which are helpful in finding stubs related to a given category. These - and other information about stubs - can be found listed at Wikipedia:Stub.
If you are going to tag stubs, please take the time to find a proper specific stub tag. using {{stub}} merely makes someone else do this for you. DES(talk)01:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
A tag has been placed on Kondapalli toys 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 clear 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 verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. 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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), 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. MuffledThud (talk) 08:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
A tag has been placed on Orissa Ikat 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 clear 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 verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. 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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), 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. MuffledThud (talk) 08:54, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
A tag has been placed on Thanjavur art plate 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 clear 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 verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. 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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), 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. MuffledThud (talk) 09:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply
On your claim that all Government of India documents are plublic domain:
From [1]
sec 52. Certain acts not to be infringement of copyright
...
(q) the reproduction or publication of-
(i) any matter which has been published in any Official Gazette except an Act of a Legislature;
(ii) any Act of a Legislature subject to the condition that such Act is reproduced or published together with any commentary thereon or any other original matter;
(iii) the report of any committee, commission, council, board or other like body appointed by the Government if such report has been laid on the Table of the Legislature, unless the reproduction or publication of such report is prohibited by the Government;
(iv) any judgement or order of a court, tribunal or other judicial authority, unless the reproduction or publication of such judgment or order is prohibited by the court, the tribunal or other judicial authority, as the case may be;
This says that in India, the following may be freely reproduced legally: the contents of Official Gazettes; Acts of a Legislature; reports of committees, commissions, councils, or boards; judgements or orders of a court, tribunal or other judicial authority. Yhis may be more of an automatic liscence than a placemetn in the public domain. Other government works are copyrighted, as sec 52 is an exception to a general rule that all works are copyrighted. See Indian copyright law where this passage is quoted. Nothing that i have been able to find says or in any way clearly imnplies that ALL works of the GoI are exempt from copyright. IANAL but at this point the burden is I think on you to find a clear-cut source for your claim. I would advise rewriting the artilcles using the text you nowe have as a source of facts but rewriting in original words, just as if you were sure that the source was under copyright protection. DES(talk) 00:14, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure Micro101 knows how to delete the page User_talk:Sleeper. As you know, you can just replace the contents with {{db-u1}}. Cheers. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:30, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
No he can't or if he does any admin will decline the request. That page has non-trivial page hsitory (warning tags) from users other than the requesting user. Therefore WP:CSD#U1 doesn't apply. I protected the page to lock in the redir, see the discussion above. DES(talk) 06:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Your addition to Kondapalli toys has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. NJA(t/c) 13:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).
First prove that the material is copyrighted. It hasnt been proved that the material is in public domain, nor has it been proved that it is a copyrighted work. Sasank Sleeper (talk) 21:40, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Decline reason:
In almost all jurisdictions, copyright subsists in all works automatically, unless the law provides for exceptions. For this reason, it is your responsibility to convince your fellow editors that any works by others that you use are in the public domain or freely licenced. Sandstein 22:40, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Hi. As an administrator working the copyright problems board, I noticed that you seem to have been unclear about the copyright status of works of the Indian government. Unfortunately, aside from a few exceptions, the works of the Government of India are fully protected by copyright. Consider The Handbook of Copyright Law produced by the Indian government, which indicates that "In the case of a government work, government shall, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, be the first owner of the copyright therein" and this passage which defines the term of expiration: "In the case of cinematograph films, sound recordings, photographs, posthumous publications, anonymous and pseudonymous publications, works of government and works of international organisations, the 60-year period is counted from the date of publication" (emphasis added). In the copyright rules of 1957, section 52(q) excludes as copyright violations the "reproduction or publication" of certain government works. However, they don't require the retention of certain materials in subsection ii (material in the public domain can be reproduced without such restrictions). They also explicitly exclude (and therefore do extend copyright protection) to committee reports from the Table of the Legislature and court/tribunal/judicial judgements if a recognized authority has forbidden reproduction. That means that even in these cases, it's a good bit more complex than figuring out US public domain status, where most US gov't works are explicitly public domain unless noted otherwise. Fortunately for us, we can use binding laws, codes & regulations produced by the Indian government anyway, as US Law regards such material as public domain, and the US laws are the ones that govern the Wikimedia Foundation.
Nevertheless, most works of the government of India are copyrighted. See, too, the "Terms of Use" at the National Informatics Centre website, which says "Material featured on this Portal may be reproduced free of charge after taking proper permission by sending a mail to us. However, the material has to be reproduced accurately and not to be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context." This is not public domain, though it is a liberal license, but it is not a liberal enough license for Wikipedia. All material reported here must be free for reuse and modification and there can be no requirement for permission.
I'm sorry for the difficulties you encountered over this situation. Working out various international copyrights and how they apply to the US-based Wikimedia Foundation is a difficult task. Typically, it is safest to presume material cannot be used unless it fits within the parameters set out at Wikipedia:Public domain or you can otherwise verify it is free of copyright or compatibly licensed.
Please let me know at my talk page if you have any questions about this. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 01:10, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
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), 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Josh Parris 11:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Since I still had your talk page on my watchlist following my recent communication to you, I noticed the above and investigated. I believe that you may have intended to create this as a user subpage since the page is obviously not an article, but related to project work; it seems you may have inadvertently put it in article space. I've moved it to User:Alexsoddy/Test and removed the speedy deletion template. If I have misunderstood your intentions, please let me know. If at any point you are finished with it and want it cleaned up, please just tag it {{db-g7}}, which will notify an administrator that you would like the material removed. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 11:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi, can you tell me the Devanagari version of his name? Thank you. Hekerui (talk) 17:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Arent you German ? Why are you interested in him ? OK here is the name in devanagari : मंगळंपल्लि बालमुरळीकृष्ण Sasank Sleeper (talk) 18:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I wanted to check whether he had a page on the Hindi Wikipedia. I'm also interested in Indian classical music. Best Hekerui (talk) 19:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:New Moore.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:25, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Shashank, Thanks for the message.
Before his marriage, suman stated that he is constructing a house in vizag and once it is done, he will marry. considering the above statement I have modified his article in wikipedia. you can also refer this link.http://www.bollywoodbilli.com/tag/suman-setty/
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Prabhudeva.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. Vssun (talk) 11:19, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
APPEAL TO YOU
Reg: [BRAHMAN PUJAN] , [UNIVERSAL PRAYERS] . written by [Naresh Sonee]
On wikipedia , These above two pages are far older than the present article [Brahman]
References of above titles are also available on New York site - http://www.printsasia.com/BookDetails.aspx?Id=445813482
Meanwhile, Can your good selves in Wiki Project Indian Community re-create a precise pages on [Naresh Sonee] & his book [Brahmand Pujan] – [Brahmaand Pujan] . However, Sonee is the writer of this book [Brahmand Pujan] written in 1999 . registered with Government of India- HRRD. Details of the registration is provided here on http://brhmaandpujanbook.tripod.com/ . More than sufficient, news and reviews are there on http://brhmaandpujan-news-reviews.tripod.com/
Since 5-6 yrs, for one or the other reason pages of [Naresh Sonee] & [Brahmand Pujan] are faced by communal bias from outside India so these articles over and again get deleted here in Wikipedia for minor reasons. However, many hits of - Naresh Sonee reflects on google search engine also. So, I request Wiki Indian community to kindly come forward and generously help these two pages to grow, as I am fed up to fight my case alone here [left] and moved out long back. Meanwhile, such an important info/issue on ‘Indian literature’ which adds & spell ‘new meaning /dimension’ to Brahman -should it stay lost else ignored? Your community panel has to judge at last.
Myself, will not be on Wikipedia, for the same i apologise, but- pls. help these two pages to get reinstalled, reap, sow and grow, if you too feel so, I appeal to do this munificent favour. Regards- Dralansun (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC).
Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.
As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.
If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide.
Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.
You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.
Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:59, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Telugu Nadu. Since you had some involvement with the Telugu Nadu redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Abote2 (talk) 09:52, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:38, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Done, it's now at User:Alexsoddy/GVMC Dutch Bungalow. tedder (talk) 18:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Lagadapati Rajagopal has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. --ZooFari 01:28, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Your addition to Kondapalli toys has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. NJA (t/c) 13:03, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Template:Infobox testcasejk has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Johnuniq (talk) 04:43, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
