User talk:Cmsreview

Welcome!

Hello, Cmsreview, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 23:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MifterBot,

Thanks very much for this discussion page. I am not sure what to do to describe the copyright on the image below. I wrote a story on Wiggio for EContent Magazine and decided to make this Wikipedia page, too. I asked the Wiggio CEO for permission to use their logo and he said OK. So I did a screenshot and edited it to the small logo for Wikipedia.

How do you recommend it be licensed? I went to the Image page and added PD:self for now. Cmsreview (talk) 23:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, MifterBot,

I went to the 37 signals page, which I also mentioned in my story and used as a model for the Wiggio page to see how their logo was licensed. I basically adapted their license info. I hope that works. Cheers Cmsreview (talk) 00:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for Image:WiggioBetaLogo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WiggioBetaLogo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 23:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for File:WiggioBetaLogo.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:WiggioBetaLogo.jpg. Unfortunately, I think that you have not provided a proper rationale for using this image under "fair use". Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. Note that the image description page must include the exact name or a link to each article the image is used in and a separate rationale for each one. (If a link is used, automated processes may improperly add the related tag to the image. Please change the fair use template to refer to the exact name, if you see this warning.)

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rockfang (talk) 04:17, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Free will models

A tag has been placed on Free will models requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Dr.K. logos 03:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Randolph Clarke

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Randolph Clarke, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.fsu.edu/~philo/new%20site/staff/clarke.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Puppet

Cmsreview seems to be a sock-puppet of Bob Doyle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.171.175 (talk) 14:39, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Adequate determinism

The article Adequate determinism has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No encyclopedic value. Philosophical opinion piece.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:29, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

About your contributions ...

Just want to let you know that I'm asking people at WikiProject Philosophy to have a look at your contribution. You may join the discussion here. I'm mostly concerned about the quantity of material you have incorporated from that website and that some terminology/interpretation may be unique to that source. Otherwise, I have no negative opinion about the quality of the material. Regards, Vesal (talk) 21:15, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Adequate determinism

I have nominated Adequate determinism, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adequate determinism. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. – Smyth\^talk 20:10, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Information philosophy

The article Information philosophy has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. – Smyth\^talk 14:05, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Standard argument against free will

As one of very few editors who have contributed to Dilemma of determinism, you might be interested in a RfC proposal to split off the 'standard argument' as a new, separate article. Please comment. Brews ohare (talk) 16:10, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bob Doyle (inventor) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bob Doyle (inventor) 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/Bob Doyle (inventor) 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. Guy (Help!) 22:29, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Two-stage model of free will for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Two-stage model of free will 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/Two-stage model of free will 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. Peter Damian (talk) 19:14, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Do otherwise in the same circumstances for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Do otherwise in the same circumstances 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/Do otherwise in the same circumstances 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. Binksternet (talk) 03:42, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alternative possibilities for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alternative possibilities 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/Alternative possibilities 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. Binksternet (talk) 03:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Free will in antiquity for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Free will in antiquity 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/Free will in antiquity 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. Binksternet (talk) 03:44, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Randolph Clarke for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Randolph Clarke 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/Randolph Clarke 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. Binksternet (talk) 03:48, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Self-determination (philosophy) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Self-determination (philosophy) 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/Self-determination (philosophy) 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. Binksternet (talk) 03:48, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Dilemma of determinism for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dilemma of determinism 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/Dilemma of determinism 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. Binksternet (talk) 03:48, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Cmsreview/Free will models

User:Cmsreview/Free will models, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Cmsreview/Free will models and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Cmsreview/Free will models during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 03:57, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:WiggioBetaLogo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WiggioBetaLogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair 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) 18:11, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]