Holversb

Nonradiation conditions

I suggest you use chapter 4 in this paper as the basis for an article on Nonradiation condition. You have read the listed sources and can thus quote them. If possible, leave Mills out of the article and quote only mainstream sources. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

P.S If you allow me to use your copyrighted material, I could start a draft at User:Holversb/Nonradiation condition. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead. And good idea. Holversb (talk) 19:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I imported your text and references and wikified it according to WP:MoS. Added two references. Going to sleep now. Will work on it tommorrow. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 04:51, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

P.S. - We need a name for the article. Suggestions? -- Petri Krohn (talk) 04:52, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I have restoted the talk page to User talk:Holversb/Nonradiation condition. I responded to your comments. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 23:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Copyright issues

Could you please save the draft to this version using the following edit summary: "Released original material under GFDL. -- Brett Holverstott, copyright owner". This will take care of part of the copyright problems. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 13:58, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Denouement-8.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Denouement-8.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 08:06, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Files labelled with licensed for Wikipedia only are mercilessly deleted. It could have been possible to have a fair use rationale for the picture, which could have applied if there was an article, or at least a paragraph about the picture. But we cannot have it just to illustrate the artist's work. But it was not there. So I have have deleted as unacceptable license with no prospect of fair use at this point. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:23, 22 June 2009 (UTC)