Freshmutt

Welcome to the Wikipedia!

Welcome to the Wikipedia, Freshmutt! And thanks for Wikifying Spanish-American War on the Guantanamo Bay page. Hope you enjoy editing here and becoming a Wikipedian! Here are some perfunctory tips to hasten your acculturation into the Wikipedia experience:

• Take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial and Manual of Style.
• When you have time, take a look at The five pillars of Wikipedia, and assume good faith, but keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
• Always keep the notion of NPOV in mind, be respectful of others' POV, and remember your unique perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
• If you need any help, post your question at the Help Desk.
• Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!

Some odds and ends: Boilerplate text, Brilliant prose, Cite your sources, Civility, Conflict resolution, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Pages needing attention, Peer review, Policy Library, Utilities, Verifiability, Village pump, Wikiquette, and you can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes: ~~~~.

Best of luck, Freshmutt, and have fun! Ombudsman 19:08, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Innyrds.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Innyrds.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) 17:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:1795 flowing hair dollar obverse.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:1795 flowing hair dollar obverse.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 15:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:1795 flowing hair dollar reverse.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:1795 flowing hair dollar reverse.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 15:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

sources, WP:BURDEN

Per WP:BURDEN, when another editor challenges your addition because of lack of sourcing, it is the editor inserting the material that is responsible for finding a source and adding the source to the article. Do not restore unsourced material to articles after it has been challenged. In this case, I'll dredge the damn source up myself to avoid edit warring, but do not repeat this behaviour in the future: when another editor removes material you had added, don't just put it back because you don't think it's your job to provide sources. It is always the inserting editor's job to locate and provide the source.—Kww(talk) 03:07, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I've just searched, and I can't find a reliable source that describes them as "blue-eyed soul". CDUniverse.com provides user reviews that describe them that way, but they don't pass WP:RS. Amazon provides user reviews that describe them that way, but we can't use user reviews on Amazon as sources. There are a lot of Wikipedia mirrors that describe them that way, but we can't use Wikipedia or Wikipedia mirrors as sources. There are a lot of blogs that describe them that way, but we can't use blogs as sources. There are a lot of fan-sites that describe them that way, but we can't use fan-sites as sources. I'll remove them from the list Monday morning if you haven't located a reliable source by then.—Kww(talk) 03:17, 11 June 2011 (UTC)