User talk:Katja9 10

Welcome!

Hello, Katja9 10, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Dr Debug (Talk) 01:48, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on Wikipedia's movie articles! However, please don't copy plot summaries from imdb (or other sources). Wikipedia's content needs to be licensable under the GFDL, and unless you were the one who originally wrote those plot summaries, we need to respect their copyrights. Thanks! Steve Summit (talk) 16:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 3% for major edits and 14% for minor edits. (Based on the last 111 major and 14 minor edits in the article namespace.)

This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 19:00, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your energetic contributons, but if I can make another suggestion: pick a couple of movies you know well, and write something new and original about them. We're going for quality here, not quantity. If someone could get the same information about a movie (cast list, plot summary, trivia/goofs, etc) at imdb, there's no need to have a redundant page here. (And of course we can't cut-and-paste any of that other information here, either.) Thanks for trying to paraphrase the plot summaries, but it would be better still if you could write them from scratch. Steve Summit (talk) 19:23, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have to disagree with Steve a little here. We have a rule against writing original things, called "no original research", so you should only be making contributions that you can back up directly by reference to another site. Also wikipedia is for everyone, not just people with the internet who can access the imdb, so duplicating information is not a problem as long as the topic is reasonably important. Of course, copyright is a problem for us, so please use your own words when you write. Kappa 03:36, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Katja9 10! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 876 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Tony Tedeschi - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Lindsey McKeon - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Zake Thomas - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:43, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kate Frost 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/Kate Frost until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:31, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article T. J. Hart 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/T. J. Hart until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 05:59, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Missy Monroe 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/Missy Monroe until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 09:13, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rachel Rotten 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/Rachel Rotten until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:22, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article Horror Vision has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable film with no know actors or third party independent reviews.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Donaldd23 (talk) 21:16, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hatred of a Minute 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/Hatred of a Minute 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.

The Film Creator (talk) 21:43, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the article on Black Roses to being a draft, Draft:Black Roses, as the article currently doesn't satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements because it doesn't have any sources or references to support the information contained in the article. It will need to be improved and referenced before it is moved to the mainspace. Dan arndt (talk) 06:07, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Katja9 10. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Black Roses, 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) 04:00, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]