User talk:Lilyshang

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:JohnScully.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:JohnScully.jpg has a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission, which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3). While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case[1][2]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:JohnScully.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 18:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Riococo.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Riococo.jpg has a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission, which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3). While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case[3][4]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Riococo.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 19:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on John Patrick Scully, by Seattlenow (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because the article is a page created primarily to disparage its subject or a biography of a living person that is controversial in tone and unsourced, where there is no neutral point of view version in the history to revert to. (CSD G10).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting the article, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate the article itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 23:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm one of the many administrators here, and I declined to delete the article on John Patrick Scully because he is apparently notable, despite the highly inappropriate article: in addition to the images discussed above, it contained a long except from a copyrighted book, an unsourced quotation, an CV, and other elements that are not right for an entry in an encyclopedia.

I fixed the worst of it. If you are connected in some way with the author, i would have expected an article about a prize-winning journalist to have shown at least minimal awareness of the nature and style of the publication being targeted, as could be obtained from reading our extensive help pages and by examining other articles.

If you expect this article to remain on WP, every factual assertion in it, especially the prizes, will need third party documentation from reliable published sources. Reporters--and those who edit their work--are supposed to know about things like that. The routine biographical facts can be taken from an official web site. Book reviews for the book should be given, and the publisher specified.

And, most important, none of the remaining text can have been copied from previously published material, unless released to us under the GFDL copyright license. DGG (talk) 03:27, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook, his website, and blogs in general are not reliable published sources We need references in newspaper or trade magazine articles to his winning these prizes, and to the other accomplishments. Every one of them. DGG (talk) 01:20, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The John Scully article page should have been Moved to John Scully (athlete)--not transfered via cut&paste (also note the lowercase 'a' in athlete), then the redirect page converted to the disambiguation content. Using cut&paste separates the content from its edit history, which is a problem with the GFDL license, among other things, which admins then have to clean up. Sohelpme 20:32, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lilyshang! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. 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 this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 735 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. John Scully (journalist) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 04:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions! 129.49.72.78 (talk) 17:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions are appreciated, but, in this recent edit to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lily Shang, you removed Articles for deletion notices from articles or removed other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates. This makes it difficult to establish consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 00:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]