Sbanker

Protected email

A tag has been placed on Protected email, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done 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. If you plan to provide more material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately, and also put a note on Talk:Protected email. An administrator should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 1 under Articles. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and then immediately add such material. —Keakealani 18:08, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Deleted page "Compliance email"

A page you created, or image you uploaded, Compliance email, has been deleted in accordance with our deletion policy. In particular, it meets the one or more criteria for speedy deletion; the relevant criterion is:

Articles providing little or no context.

Wikipedia has certain standards for inclusion that all articles must meet. Certain types of article must establish the notability of their subject by asserting its importance or significance. Additionally, since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, content inappropriate for an encyclopedia, or content that would be more suited to somewhere else (such as a directory or social networking website) is not acceptable. See What Wikipedia is not for the relevant policy.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable notability guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content; it will be deleted again and may be protected from re-creation. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article. If you have any questions, please contact an administrator for assistance. Thank you – Gurch 20:48, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Digital Postmarks

Please do not remove merge proposal templates. Further deletions will make it necessary to treat this matter as a dispute and persue dispute resolution mechanisms. --Gerry Ashton 02:09, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for thatSbanker 02:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Let me add that I consider the USPS Electronic postmark notable, and believe it should be described in some appropriate article. At this time I believe the Timestamp article is the most appropriate place. As far as I can tell the ePostmark company is just a startup company, which may or may not amount to anything, and is not yet suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. --Gerry Ashton 02:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Phishing

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Phishing. 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. --Gerry Ashton 02:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Compliance email moved to United States email regulations

Your most recent creation of Compliance email has been moved to United States email regulations, as I believe the new name more closely represents the article's current subject in an international encyclopedia. I would like to point out that I consider this article to be largely a copyright violation of http://www.windowsecurity.com/uplarticle/anti-spam/Singlefin%20Email%20Compliance%20WhitePaper.pdf (which you have listed as a source on the article). Do you hold the copyright of that whitepaper? Please either quickly rectify this, or discuss the matter further. John Vandenberg 00:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)