Little Willow
Image tagging for Image:Menastones.jpg edit
Thanks for uploading Image:Menastones.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:Nimble.jpg edit
Thanks for uploading Image:Nimble.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi Little Willow, I just saw your edits to An Abundance of Katherines. That's a really well written book review! I see it's available here as well. Unfortunately (and I hate to be the bearer of bad news) Wikipedia doesn't really allow critical reviews, in fact, Wikipedia doesn't publish original thought at all. It's perfect for Amazon, really one of the best reviews I've ever seen on Amazon, but at Wikipedia, pages about books should only have basic plot summaries, and then information about the publication itself, it's critical reception, etc. Imagine if an editor read this sentence: "Fans of John Green's Printz Award-winning novel Looking for Alaska will not be disappointed by his sophomore effort" and thought "Actually, I was sort of disappointed" and so he rewrote your review with a negative review of his own? You can imagine the sort of war back and forth that can happen. It makes for good review writing, but not-so-good encyclopedia articles, if you see what I mean. Thanks for your understanding and if you have any questions don't hesitate to ask! --JayHenry 04:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Also, don't sign your name to edits. Czolgolz 04:59, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
License tagging for Image:Crashing.jpg edit
Thanks for uploading Image:Crashing.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:
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. 21:06, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Tears.jpg edit
Thanks for uploading Image:Tears.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Menastones.jpg edit
Thank you for uploading Image:Menastones.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 15:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)