User talk:Cyclotronwiki

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions to the Issues in Freirean pedagogy article, but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! Adam ^(talk) 20:22, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dont understand, the page is also here: http://www.debtireland.org/resources/economic-literacy/Frieire-background-reading1.htm That university does not own it. Cyclotron 20:32, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The same as the above issue also goes for Pedagogy of the Oppressed, which I just deleted as a copyright violation from here. --Joann e B 20:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neologisms

Hi Cyclotron, a while ago you made comments on the Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms guideline. I am proposing a revision to the guideline and I'm soliciting your comments. You can find the link to my rewrite at Wikipedia talk:Avoid neologisms -- cmh 00:52, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:Elementbox heatingvalue

A tag has been placed on Template:Elementbox heatingvalue requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense of Pappea capensis

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Pappea capensis, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Pappea capensis provides no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Pappea capensis, 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. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 14:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:PauloFreire.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:PauloFreire.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair 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.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 15:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfD nomination of Project namespace

Proposed deletion of Teresa Wong

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Teresa Wong, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Not verifiably notable.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Scott Mac (Doc) 13:35, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Employment Rights Act 1996 (United Kingdom)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Employment Rights Act 1996 (United Kingdom), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Employment Rights Act 1996. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot 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) 07:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 2010

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Employment Rights Act 1996 a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. VernoWhitney (talk) 02:37, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Portal namespace listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Portal namespace. Since you had some involvement with the Portal namespace redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:51, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]