User talk:Charliephere

This is Charliephere's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Santiago (Internet Meme) (May 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Santiago (Internet Meme) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 10:46, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Charliephere! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Theroadislong (talk) 10:46, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Santiago (Internet Meme)

Hello, Charliephere. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Santiago (Internet Meme), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:05, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GBStudio moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to GBStudio. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and it is promotional and reads like an advertisement. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. GrabUp - Talk 14:55, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Im unsure how i can detail it's features without sounding promotional Charliephere (talk) 15:03, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Santiago (meme character) moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Santiago (meme character). Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit for review" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 15:41, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Angloscript

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Angloscript requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://github.com/Lowena-Cove/AngloScript-Docs/tree/main. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 18:18, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Charliephere. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Angloscript, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Based on your message at Talk:Angloscript where you say that you created Lowena Cove (the organization/team behind the Angloscript language), which seems credible given that the GitHub repo for the AngloScript documentation already contains a link to the just-created Wikipedia article. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 18:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing in the article that is biased or self-promotive, it is purely to document an overview of the language inside the world's encyclopedia, it is not advertising, people arent going to find it unless they are searching for something like it.

Also, you may feel free to modify the page, but it is definitely not worth deletion. Charliephere (talk) 18:42, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Santiago (meme character) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Santiago (meme character) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Santiago (meme character) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 22:55, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too much effort put in to warrant deletion Charliephere (talk) 23:19, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Tenconi

Hello, I'm Woodroar. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Nick Tenconi, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you!

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Woodroar (talk) 00:10, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Martin (artist)

I've started a discussion about the notability of Greg Martin (artist) at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Greg Martin (artist). You're welcome to join the discussion there. Woodroar (talk) 00:23, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok Charliephere (talk) 00:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning - article creations

Hello, I'm Serge, an Admin here on Wikipedia. I've noticed that you've created 3-4 articles today, all deeply flawed and facing deletion at various venues for various reasons. You need to stop until you better understand Wikipedia's policies and standards. WP:WIKIPEDIAADVENTURE and WP:5P are good starts for learning information, while creating WP:DRAFTs and asking for review at WP:AFC are better ways to start articles as a beginner. But don't keep at it as you've been doing today, or you'll find your account temporarily blocked from editing. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 01:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another note - until you take the time to learn what sort of sources are usable and unusable on Wikipedia, be try to consult guidance at places like WP:RSP and WP:VG/S. Both have a ton of examples of usable and unusable sources.

Particularly, be aware of WP:USERG and WP:YOUTUBE, as a lot of your additions seem to violate this. You can't be using things like Reddit posts, fansites, etc. Sergecross73 msg me 18:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Created? Charliephere (talk) 19:28, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the question. Sergecross73 msg me 19:46, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think I've *created* any today, also I think disallowing all Youtube and Fan-Wikis etc is a bit of a flawed policy, I understand for things like innaccurate Fan-Wikis and Youtube videos which are rumour-filled and clickbaity, but for my edit here for example, the Youtube video was a clip of an official livestream saying and doing exactly what I SAID it was doing in the article, same with the forums/fan-wikis which outright contain leaked legit documents and snippets of official comic panels etc, I dont think it should be banned from being used as the source for a part of an article, it should be moderated instead.

everything i've put is factually accurate, just not got alot of real news citation Charliephere (talk) 20:05, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My original message was written on Dec 27th - 2 days ago. I'm referring to the ones you created that day. 2 are already deleted, and 2 are well on their way to deletion in their deletion discussions.

As far as the policies and guidelines go, it doesn't really matter if you agree with them or not - as long as they are active and in effect, you need to follow them. Have you noticed how much of your work has been deleted, undone, or heavily reworked? A lot. Your additions are not in line with the websites standards, and the community has, and will continue to, keep removing your work. You've got the change.

I know there's a lot to learn about Wikipedia, and I'm sympathetic to that. It takes time. But Im not sympathetic when editors aren't making any effort to learn and change. If you keep blasting forward, guns blazing, without any attempt to learn how the website works, a temporary block on your account will force you to slow down. Let's please not push it to that. Sergecross73 msg me 20:25, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Have you noticed how much of your work has been deleted, undone, or heavily reworked? A lot.", but how much of that information was actually wrong?

"As far as the policies and guidelines go, it doesn't really matter if you agree with them or not - as long as they are active and in effect, you need to follow them." that is never a good way to run a project with the purpose of being a factually accurate source of information, like if someone confirmed something about the story or lore of a game or a political policy or something like that, but that confirmation is only on Youtube as an interview video, or as text on fan wikis and tiny news sites, in order to keep in line with WIKIPEDIA's rules you'd have to miss out that information. Or for a peice of software that hasnt had many external documentation so in order to discusss how it works u have to cite from the official websites/documents etc themselves, which isnt allowed either (if what you've said about PKHeX is true, btw there's no reason to delete a page on it, or Greg Martin's page or anything like that). And simply saying "doesnt matter if our rules are bad, follow them or no adding info to things" is a rather daft approach to dealing with this criticsm, either way if i complain/ignore and get banned/article-deletions or continue heading your advice, I STILL wouldnt be able to add the same peice of factually accurate information to your articles, also that whole stuff for Sally (List Of Sonic Characters) shoudlnt have been deleted, every part of that was correct information.

You need to moderate sources, not blacklist a certain platform/format of info entirely Charliephere (talk) 21:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need to learn what Wikipedia is, and what it aims to do. There's plenty of things that are "correct" but still fall outside the scope of what the website. For instance, I bet some people would totally love it if we included the phone number and address of every single Pizza Hut in the world so it was easier to order food. But we don't. Why? Because that's not the function of an encyclopedia, even if the info itself is correct.

Same applies to your editing. Want to write about fan sentiments about the Sonic fandom using fansites, social media, and Reddit? Great! There's like five Sonic/Sega fan wikias that love that stuff. Take it there. You're in the wrong place if you want to do it here though.

Above all, Wikipedia is not my website, so even if you somehow persuaded me, I'd still be powerless to change things. That should be clear in the way that a wide variety of editors across the website are removing your work. I'm merely the admin you caught you first. Even if I looked the other way, and other admin would be here soon with warnings and eventual blocks. So please drop this line of argument. Either learn how the website works, or your account will be blocked from editing. Sergecross73 msg me 21:19, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"You need to learn what Wikipedia is, and what it aims to do. There's plenty of things that are "correct" but still fall outside the scope of what the website. For instance, I bet some people would totally love it if we included the phone number and address of every single Pizza Hut in the world so it was easier to order food. But we don't. Why? Because that's not the function of an encyclopedia, even if the info itself is correct.

Same applies to your editing. Want to write about fan sentiments about the Sonic fandom using fansites, social media, and Reddit? Great! There's like five Sonic/Sega fan wikias that love that stuff. Take it there. You're in the wrong place if you want to do it here though." These 2 Paragraphs imply that what I was talking about was not heavily linked to what the subject was, stuff like a characters last appearance, who they are, where they came from, or something like how a peice of software actually works, is not the same as pointlessly doing sentiments or whatever you're saying about pizaa hut etc.

"Above all, Wikipedia is not my website, so even if you somehow persuaded me, I'd still be powerless to change things." WHO does make the changes?? Charliephere (talk) 21:39, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're missing the point. You edits are incompatible with the website. This is one of the biggest encyclopedia (and websites) in existence. No one's changing the rules for a newbie who refuses to listen or learn. Either learn, or take it elsewhere. If you don't, your account will be blocked.

If you decide to go the route of learning how Wikipedia works, things like WP:WIKIPEDIAADVENTURE and WP:5P. They will help a lot. Sergecross73 msg me 21:58, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Your edits are incompatible with the website." That is inaccurate.

"No one's changing the rules for a newbie who refuses to listen or learn" I'm not asking to change the rules because of me, I'm asking to change to rules because this is an objectively bad policy lmao, I'm allowed to contest policies, and explain why there are bad, but it seems you don't want to listen...

"Either learn, or take it elsewhere. If you don't, your account will be blocked." That's unnecessary and tbh really stupid.

"If you decide to go the route of learning how Wikipedia works, things like WP:WIKIPEDIAADVENTURE and WP:5P. They will help a lot." Im going to learn more anyways, but the points isnt that I currently don't know how wikipedia works, the point is that now that i have an understanding of how it works, it has revealed a significantly limiting flaw in the rules of the site and documentation of information.

Im not here to pick fights, I'm here to just add more important and interesting information to these articles, and hopefully show that these "blacklisted" sources can be useful/notable when utilised correctly and moderated well, and at times are more accurate or developed than wikipedia because they dont limit their citations based on how professional they have to look. Charliephere (talk) 23:04, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not based on "how professional they look", it's about how professional they are. The sources that we have determined to be reliable have clear cut editorial policies, a staff team with prior experience in the field, and valid credentials. At least for web-based sources, which may I add a lot of experienced editors tend to try and avoid in favor of books or academic sourcing. Anyone can say whatever they want on a YouTube video or a fan wiki and the chances of people checking for it are slim, per the user-generated content policy. We don't even allow citing Wikipedia itself for similar reasons. We are very well aware that we may be leaving out information by excluding these sources, but they are simply not suitable to use on an encyclopedia.

Think of it as writing an essay or research paper. Do you think your paper and grade would look better if you cited a YouTube video or a fan wiki (when even using Wikipedia in school is frowned upon), or if you cited a news article from BBC or a history book you checked out at the library. Chances are, regardless of if the latter may have left out some information, it should probably be clear that the YouTube video or fan wiki are not really the best sources to go for. And even then, just to clarify a bit further, refer back to my point about even some people viewing news article sources as (in some subject areas, understandably) not-ideal sources.

As for if those fan wikis or YouTube videos are more developed than Wikipedia, yeah that's probably true at times. But that's something you can change when you realize Wikipedia is a goal towards building an encyclopedia, not a fandom site. λ NegativeMP1 18:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should not prioritise an article's professionalism over factual accuracy, that is simply bad policy. Charliephere (talk) 22:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that's what they were saying, but it doesn't feel like you're trying to understand anything you're being told, so Im not going to argue with you any further. It's very simple. Follow the current policies and guidelines, or you'll be blocked from editing. Sergecross73 msg me 23:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, I just believe these policies are limiting and the reasoning behind them is mediocre, especially considering this is to do with me citing correct information in pages that are completely to do with the subject, and for the most part other than those hiccups I have been following the policies. Blocking me from adding factually accurate and relevant information on a platform all about accessible and complete information is rather ironic, wouldnt you agree? Charliephere (talk) 23:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, you haven't, and no, I wouldn't. You shouldn't have a talk page full of warnings and deletion notices over the course of a few days like this. Please listen to the things people are telling you. Sergecross73 msg me 23:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for ignoring my points, might as well have not said anything, either way, i dont care, im probably not gonna edit much and thankfully alot of other stuff i might edit has more sources that fit your terrible policy, so yeah, i wont be violating another rule anytime soon. Charliephere (talk) 23:46, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, your points seem to largely consist of complaining about Wikipedia policy, and thats not really why I'm here right now. I'm here to make sure you stop ignoring them and start following them. If you're going to follow them, then I'll leave you be. Sergecross73 msg me 04:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm complaining because it's bad policy, sources should be moderated and processed on a case-by-case basis, not being completely blacklisted due to the platform/format it's from. Charliephere (talk) 13:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you truly think that and continue to avoid our points, then this talk page is not the place to express your complaints. I'm not really sure where the best place to discuss them would be, but it would probably be the talk page of WP:V or WP:RS. λ NegativeMP1 19:05, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did ask previously on where/who I could consult to over this, I wasnt given an answer Charliephere (talk) 19:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Angloscript

Hi Charliephere, and welcome to Wikipedia. Please note that articles on Wikipedia must be about topics that have attained notability. For example, a programming language must meet the general notability guideline before an article on Wikipedia can be created about it. As a language that has not yet been covered in independent reliable sources, Angloscript does not meet the general notability guideline and a Wikipedia article about Angloscript would not be appropriate at this time.

Additionally, since you are associated with Angloscript, please keep in mind that it is best to avoid writing about topics on Wikipedia for which you have a conflict of interest. If Angloscript becomes notable in the future, it is likely that someone else will eventually write an article about it without your involvement. At that point, please note that content from a source code repository without a Wikipedia-compatible license cannot be copied into Wikipedia in a way that would not be considered fair use. Thank you. — Newslinger talk 03:18, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi Charliephere! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! — Newslinger talk 03:19, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of PKHeX for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PKHeX is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PKHeX until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 07:52, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Please do not delete or alter legitimate talk page comments from other editors, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Santiago (meme character). Such edits are disruptive, and may appear to other editors to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 12:11, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable non-free use File:Image of nick tenconi.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Image of nick tenconi.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file's talk page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 14:24, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Greg Martin (artist) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Greg Martin (artist) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Martin (artist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Woodroar (talk) 19:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:GBSTUDIOLOGO.png

Thanks for uploading File:GBSTUDIOLOGO.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

Hello, I'm CommunityNotesContributor. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to 2024 Southport stabbing seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. CNC (talk) 17:17, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Labour Party (UK). Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Woodroar (talk) 19:50, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't Charliephere (talk) 21:03, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for File:INEVWESTTOMMYXREFORM.png

Thanks for uploading File:INEVWESTTOMMYXREFORM.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:30, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Despite all the warnings about policy and using sources, you just added unsourced content to multiple articles. This is unacceptable. Your account is blocked for 3 days. Take the time to actually learn our sourcing policies. Sergecross73 msg me 23:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:INEVWESTTOMMYXREFORM.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:INEVWESTTOMMYXREFORM.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]