User talk:Klostermankl
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Social network service. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. FreplySpang 01:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
The article you created CareFlash has been WP:CSD deleted. I looked at the article before deletion and it maybe notable per Wikipedia guidelines. Please try to contact the admin who has deleted the article and ask them that you would like to WP:AFD it. This will send it to discussion where you may have time to improve the article. The deletion admin is User:SchuminWeb. You can leave a message on his talk page and see if he willing to do that. If for some reason not, ask him for a copy of the article so you can work on it in your sandbox [[User::Klostermankl/CareFlash]] to get it up to par to Wikipedian standards. Before trying to bring it to main space again consult an admin. Also please do not post external links to the website on article pages because that would be considered Spamming. If you have a question or need some help please let me know. Igor Berger (talk) 02:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of CareFlash
A tag has been placed on CareFlash requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
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 (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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Ejay (talk) 02:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- CareFlash was previously deleted because it was a non-notable company. Others, like Facebook as you mentioned, are very notable - so much so that almost every youngster would have heard about or used it. It deserves an article. I myself have never heard of CareFlash, and if you ask any random stranger, they probably wouldn't either. So there's little point clogging up an encyclopedia with stuff people wouldn't really care about. Ejay (talk) 02:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- A social networking site does not have to be Fasebook to be notable in a particular vertical, here is medical. It has notability per businesswire.com It should at least be sent to AfD and given a proper chance to be kept or deleted by consensus. It is not Spam or blatant advertisment, or waste of Wikipedia space as you have put it, in your opinion. Igor Berger (talk) 02:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- I don't do the actual deletions, it is up to admins to delete the article. (See the deletion log for more details. But if your original intent was to promote the company/website by means of blatent advertising, then there is probably a conflict of interest here, and you should refrain from writing articles of such nature. If the company was indeed notable, someone else (a third party not affiliated with the subject) will notice and eventually write an article about it. Ejay (talk) 05:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- An univolved admin User:Faithlessthewonderboy has offered to supply a copy of CareFlash deleted article Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_March_2#CareFlash. If you would like please request him for the copy so you can work on the article in your sandbox, to improve notability. Once you have improved the article ask an admin to look at it, if advised, you can move it to main space. Igor Berger (talk) 12:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Also writing an anrticle about a company that you own or work for is not advised but can be done if you do it from WP:NPOV having your involvment declared so as not show WP:COI Igor Berger (talk) 12:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Your article is in your sandbox, feel free to work on it an improve it to meet Wikipedia notablity. User:Klostermankl/CareFlash. Regards, Igor Berger (talk) 14:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Also writing an anrticle about a company that you own or work for is not advised but can be done if you do it from WP:NPOV having your involvment declared so as not show WP:COI Igor Berger (talk) 12:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- An univolved admin User:Faithlessthewonderboy has offered to supply a copy of CareFlash deleted article Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_March_2#CareFlash. If you would like please request him for the copy so you can work on the article in your sandbox, to improve notability. Once you have improved the article ask an admin to look at it, if advised, you can move it to main space. Igor Berger (talk) 12:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- I don't do the actual deletions, it is up to admins to delete the article. (See the deletion log for more details. But if your original intent was to promote the company/website by means of blatent advertising, then there is probably a conflict of interest here, and you should refrain from writing articles of such nature. If the company was indeed notable, someone else (a third party not affiliated with the subject) will notice and eventually write an article about it. Ejay (talk) 05:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- A social networking site does not have to be Fasebook to be notable in a particular vertical, here is medical. It has notability per businesswire.com It should at least be sent to AfD and given a proper chance to be kept or deleted by consensus. It is not Spam or blatant advertisment, or waste of Wikipedia space as you have put it, in your opinion. Igor Berger (talk) 02:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:3D Animations.gif
Thank you for uploading Image:3D Animations.gif. 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 (talk) 21:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:CareFlashTitle.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:CareFlashTitle.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Example Joe.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Example Joe.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Facebook App.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Facebook App.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Joe's Calendar.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Joe's Calendar.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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 21:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Square Logo.png
Thank you for uploading Image:Square Logo.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 (talk) 21:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:CareFlashLogo.gif
Thank you for uploading Image:CareFlashLogo.gif. 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 (talk) 21:51, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi. What do you mean, a list would be good? The above article has been in existence for a very long time, and won't be duplicated. The thread you posted to was started before the above List was created. Thanks. Ref (chew)(do) 00:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (Image:CareFlashTitle.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:CareFlashTitle.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)