User talk:Hayday

Out cry Fire

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Out cry Fire, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://bandwagon.co.uk/band/OUTCRYFIRE. As a copyright violation, Out cry Fire appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Out cry Fire has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Out cry Fire. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Out cry Fire, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia.

--Allen3 ^talk 13:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Outcryfire

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Outcryfire, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://bandwagon.co.uk/band/OUTCRYFIRE. As a copyright violation, Outcryfire appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Outcryfire has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Outcryfire. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Outcryfire, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia.

--Allen3 ^talk 13:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Hayday.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hayday.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. -SCEhardT 20:11, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Out Cry Fire

I copied the text from http://www.outcryfire.co.uk - the lead singer 'mat hayday' is my own brother.

MP edits

Why are you deleting so much useful information? Your "minor clean ups" remove minor details - some relevant, some irrelevant - and also remove useful links. Wikipedia isn't like a conventional encyclopedia in that it doesn't need to be concise to fit into a 2x2 inch box on a page; more information on subjects is better. Take a look at some of the featured articles; all are articles with large amounts of information, allowing a reader to browse all the nuances of a topic. While hobbies may not be relevant on an MP's page, information on majorities, informative external links, and so on are certainly relevant and should not be removed. --User:Firien § 09:41, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Firien!

In the world of politics there are a lot if irrelevant information on people's profiles (of all party persuasions) - including past Members of Parliament that the profile need to reflect their current status. There is also self gratification and advancement or from bias researchers/activists or a political party.

I like to keep to straight facts and not use Wikipedia as a ‘bragging post’ but rather as its set up to be.

Which particular edit do you have issue with?

Regards Darren

Darren,

I'm responding to a WP:RFI placed against you. I assume the edits in question are the ones with the edit summary "minor tidy up". I would certainly agree with Firien that those edits are not 'minor', and therefore the edit summaries should reflect that. I also agree that some (though certainly not all) of what you removed is useful information. Some of it could do with being a bit more neutral, but overall it is better to deal with that by changing the language and balancing things our rather than removing information. See WP:NPOV for more on this.

Please note that I am not treating this as vandalism, and your efforts to clean up Wikipedia are very welcome! Just please remember to discuss edits if needed. Thanks, Petros471 10:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Dear Petros471,

Read and understood - I'm only trying to help, but in the future I will take a more balanced view and think twice before removing any current information.

Regards

Darren

Candidates for speedy deletion

Why have you been tagging some British political biographies with {{delete}}? It is normal when tagging a page for speedy deletion to explain which of the criteria for speedy deletion it fits under, especially when (as in some of the cases here) it has been kept at articles for deletion. David | Talk 13:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Reply

Hi David,

I'm new to editing, please bear with me.

I thought that I stated the reasons for deletion in the discussion pages. Namely 'Vanity' and Disputed notability.

In the current policy, being a local Cllr isn't enough to be justified an entry on Wilipedia.

Being an MP is.

Regards

Darren

Can I modestly suggest that you try adding information to Wikipedia before you go about trying to delete it? Meanwhile see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Boothroyd. You may also want to see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manchester councillors, where I attempted to delete an even larger number of utterly non-notable members of Manchester City Council, for the opinions of other Wikipedians on whether the subjects were notable. David | Talk 14:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Dear David,

I personally don't agree with your comments or those on your site. I do not think that you should have an entry on Wikipedia, however as it looks like you have some 'admirers' - I shall not rock the applecart.

I am purely trying to do my bit.

It just goes to show - how 'having the right friends' looking after you, comes hand in hand with the Labour party and its members.

Regards

Darren

Supporters? As a Tory supporter I am not on the same political side as David but as a fellow wikipedia editor who knows how things work here I would say he is clearly correct. He has to live with his article. He has shown that he didn't want it but is adult enough to live with it which is commendable. That you are choosing to give him a hard time for being a Labour politician is not commendable, SqueakBox 14:16, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I was just about to say something of the same substance. It probably does me a great deal of harm (among UK editors anyway) to have my political affiliations so well known. Even when I put a great deal of effort into trying to remain neutral while editing Wikipedia, people assume I must be biased or (and quite bizarrely) must have been sent by Labour Party HQ to skew Wikipedia. It's just a cross I have to bear, I guess. David | Talk 14:18, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Dear David & SqueakBox,

I'm still learning the ropes. Please bear with me. David, you mentioning about Labour HQ - its not that unheard off - believe me, I've made some slight amendments to Labour MP's and I've been threatened by some very shady Labour activists.

I hade my own page on Wiki but it was decided to remove it on the grounds of vanity and that I wasn't well known etc, so if been trying to carry out the same policy.

o(

Hence the reason for this discussion.

Regards

Darren

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion is Afd. I have to say I dont think David is working here for the Labour Party on the basis of his contributions. David did not write the article so vanity isn't actually an issue in this case which just confirms he is not here at wikipedia on behalf of the Labour party. For another person who has an article but doesn't want it (and has behaved in a very childish fashion, IMO) see Daniel Brandt, SqueakBox 15:07, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

SqueakBox,

Blimey - the guy 'is' a nutter!

I shall keep reading the rules till I get it right & carry on with my contributions.

Thank you for your patience!

Regards

Darren

I have made comments on this subject at Talk:Keith Taylor. Happy editing, Mtiedemann 16:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Your article

High Wycombe is my old town, I went to the RGS amongst other things. What exactly happened to your article. You look notable enough to me, perhaps I could try posting it myself that way it wouldn't be vanity or a candidate for speedy deletion though it is very important to follow the NPOV guidelines in terms of style so the article would have to be rewritten from what is on yuor user page with that in mind but let me know what you think. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

SqueakBox Wow it’s a small world! - I live on the same road as the RGS (Hamilton Road!) I wasn't lucky enough to go there (I went to one of the rough schools!!)But its got a really good reputation. I would be delighted if you could use the same profile that I have now under my user name on the main pages (or change it as you see fit) I originally put it straight onto Wikipedia before reading the rules.

o)

Hayday 19:58, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

See Talk:Darren Hayday, SqueakBox 23:34, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Henry Bulwer-Lytton, 1st Baron Dalling and Bulwer

Thank you for your interest in adding information to Henry Bulwer-Lytton, 1st Baron Dalling and Bulwer, however wikipedia does not permit copyright violations - the large 'copy and paste' of text from other sources, and also requires that text is properly wikified, with links to related articles, etc. It would be appreciated if you would follow these standard guidelines, citing sources were appropriate. --Vamp:Willow 11:44, 23 April 2006 (UTC)