Beaven

Welcome

Welcome! (We can't say that loud/big enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

• Be Bold!
• Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
• Meet other new users
• Learn from others
• Play nice with others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us about you

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page.

We're so glad you're here! -- Essjay · Talk 16:55, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:StepheneMoore.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:StepheneMoore.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 03:05, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:StepheneMoore.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:StepheneMoore.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 04:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 04:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:StepheneMoore.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:StepheneMoore.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Chris G Bot (talk) 00:14, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Stephene Moore

Candidates for congresses are not notable. Neither are the spouses of incumbent members of Congress. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Your verification template at The Heartland Institute

I've removed it. The source indeed says what we say it says, and it isn't our job to figure out why. All we need to know is whether it is reliably published, see WP:RS and WP:VERIFY. You misunderstood the purpose of the template. Of course, if you want to argue that a Duke University Press book by Orrin H. Pilkey isn't a reliable source, you can go to WP:RSN and challenge it. But given the authors and the publisher, I doubt you'll get much support. Doug Weller talk 15:16, 5 March 2018 (UTC)