User talk:Greg Dahlen

Hi Greg Dahlen! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:47, Monday, May 11, 2015 (UTC)

Hi Greg Dahlen! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 18:58, Monday, May 11, 2015 (UTC)

The article Heather barnett (artist) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. | Naypta^✉ opened his mouth at 11:45, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Theroadislong. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the page Environmental art, because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 12:23, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Heather barnett (artist) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Theroadislong (talk) 12:25, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Heather Barnett, artist.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 17:33, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, I cannot figure out how to, or where to, present my rationale for keeping the photo. Can you give me further explanation? Greg Dahlen (talk) 17:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Non-free images can only be used on Wikipedia under some very specific criteria. In particular, images of living people fail to meet point #1 of the criteria as one could potentially have a free image of the person if somebody were to take a picture of the subject and release it under a free license. As such, adding a fair use rationale won't result in the file being kept. As stated in the message above your choices are:

1. replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject
2. request that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license
3. create new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject)

I hope this answers your question. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 01:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, mate, I wrote TED and asked if they will make the image entirely free. If not, I would propose to use it anyway as it is the most attractive photo I can find on the Net, and it is free for educational purposes. Is it possible that instead of putting a two-day deadline on me to remove the photo, you could have simply written to me and we could have worked together to deal with the photo properly, either establish acceptable permissions for it or find a different photo? I don't see the great urgency to deal with the matter? Greg Dahlen (talk) 17:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If TED is willing to release the photo under a free license, then that will be fine. If not, I'm afraid that using it anyway will not work. It will simply be deleted as a non-free image of a living person. If you can find another free photo, that is acceptable, but you will not be able to use the existing photo in the interim. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 20:33, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, mate. But can you explain, if it is in my judgement the most attractive photo, and it is free for educational purposes, why is it not acceptable for the article? I maintain you did not have to put a deadline on me or delete the photo, you could have contacted me and we could have discussed the best approach, with the photo remaining up in the meantime. No great calamity would have come from that, correct? I see Wikipedia as a collaborative enterprise, and when you one-sidedly put a deadline on me it doesn't feel very collaborative. Comment? Greg

Please review Wikipedia:Non-free content. That explains Wikipedia's guidelines for non-free content, and the criteria for which non-free content can be used. Simply put, the image you uploaded does not meet the non-free content criteria and can't be used as-is. No amount of discussion or collaboration can make that image meet the non-free content criteria. But if you are dead-set on having a discussion, it can be listed for discussion. If that's the route you want to take, we can do it, but I guarantee you the result will be a deleted file. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 14:29, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, mate. You did see at the top of your link that exceptions can be made for common sense. To my mind it seems reasonable to use the photo for the article that I judge most attractive, don't you think, after all we want the encyclopedia to look as good as possible, no?

I maintain we could have had the discussion we are having now without any deadline being put for removal of the photo. If at the end we agreed the photo should come down then it could have come down. Greg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Heather Barnett, artist.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 17:03, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You can plead your case for keeping the file at the discussion linked above. -- Whpq (talk) 17:05, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Whpq, how does this work? I make my case and someone looks at the discussion and makes a final decision about the image? Who is that person(s)? Do they have to give their rationale for their decision where I can read it?

Would it be fair to say you are the person who has put the file onto the proposed files for deletion? But shouldn't you have spoken to my point first, I made the point that we want the most attractive images for the encyclopedia and you haven't responded to that. ---Greg Dahlen (talk) 17:14, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An administrator will review the discussion, and close the discussion based on Wikipedia guidelines and policies, and the arguments presented. I've already spoken to your point which is the image absolutely fails the non-free content criteria. If you are going to argue for an exception, then it will be at the discussion linked above. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 17:18, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Whpq, would you be the one who proposed the file for deletion? It doesn't seem you can say the image "absolutely" fails the non-free content criteria, because Wikipedia says there are common-sense exceptions, a point you haven't addressed. Anyway, apart from whatever you think Wikipedia's current policies are, I'd like your own opinion. I would like to use a non-free image (but free for educational purposes) because it is the most attractive image of an article subject, and I think Wikipedia should look as good as possible. Do you think this would be a valid reason for permitting the photo? Greg Dahlen (talk) 17:37, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Really, have you not paid any attention to what I have typed. The image absolutely fails point 1 of non-free content criteria. You can post your case, but I don't think it holds any water whatsoever. -- Whpq (talk) 17:55, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again, though, how are you saying "absolutely" if we know that Wikipedia might allow an exception, User:Whpq? Anyway, I'm not sure if you've spoken to my question since you've again mentioned Wikipedia's policies, so I'll repeat it in order to be clear. I'm not asking you whether you think the photo is allowable under Wikipedia's policies. I'm asking your personal opinion whether my argument for using the photo is convincing, that the photo is free for educational purposes and it is the most attractive photo on the Net of the article subject? I would imagine as a Wikipedia editor you also want the site to look as good as possible, am I correct? I think it would be good for me to hear how other people think about this issue. It may give me more reasons for holding my opinion, or it may convince me my opinion is wrong.

I still wonder if you are the one who proposed the photo for deletion? --Greg Dahlen (talk) 18:35, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To be absolutely 100% no nonsense clear. I proposed the file deletion. I also agree with Wikipedia's aim to provide free content so... "I don't think it [your argument] holds any water whatsoever." Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 18:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

so, Whpq, am I understanding the "free" policy correctly, let's say there were a photo of Heather Barnett that was totally free on Wikipedia. So someone could take the image, put it on a T-shirt, and sell it without obtaining any clearances from the photo's creator or paying the photo's creator? But why do we as Wikipedians care to facilitate that? --Greg Dahlen (talk) 16:37, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's alittle more complicated than that for photos of personalities as there are publicity rights that may apply, but say for a photo of a bird, then yes. And then others can build on that if they wish. I've had my photos incorporated into amazing posters. I've ahd them illustrate blog articles. If you don't beleive that is for you, that's okay. You don't have to license anything for use on Wikipedia. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 18:18, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Whpq. Can you give me a link(s) to where your photos were used?

Would you know, if one Wikipedia user puts a (totally free) photo on Wikipedia, can other Wikipedia users edit the photo on Wikipedia? For instance, can they crop it, or change the colors, or some such, but on Wikipedia, I'm sure they can do it off-site, but that's not what I'm asking.

Also, when you put a two-day deadline on the Heather Barnett photo, did Wikipedia automatically put the matter into discussion, or did you manually have to do it? Not asking to chide you, just want to know how Wikipedia works. Greg Dahlen (talk) 11:36, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply (1) I don't keep track of URLs and sites where my images are used, so no I cannot point you to any. (2) I am not aware of any tools directly supplied by Wikipedia to edit files, but as I do not do any of those things, they may simply exist and I am unaware of them. (3) The deadlines for deletion are set automatically with the templates as these timelines are what has been discussed and agreed through Wikipedia policy. -- Whpq (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Heather Barnett, artist.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:26, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Refraction, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Propagation. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:31, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Scratch orchestra (type of orchestra) 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/Scratch orchestra (type of orchestra) 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.

Hi there, I just received the message you left on my talk page about me putting a template on the George Makdisi article, but if you take a look at the only edit I made to that page, you will see that I never added any template to article. My edit was cleaning up manual of style, and adding categories, it was the edit previous to the one I made that added the templates. However, that BLP references template doesn't even belong there, as the article is not about a living person. I would say the editor added it by mistake, not noticing the subject died in 2002, but you are still going to need more than an obituary to establish notability. Cmr08 (talk) 01:38, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--Thanks, Cmr08. Sorry, my mistake. Well, we see in the article he has published at least five books, and we know from his academic background these would be respectable, scholarly books. Is this sufficient to establish notability? I would think so but would like your opinion. Greg Dahlen (talk) 06:44, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Greg Dahlen. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Greg Dahlen. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Greg Dahlen, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to So Percussion have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:06, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Societal attitudes toward homosexuality, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, no one article perfectly illuminated the word "Indic" in the original article that I turned into a link. I thought by linking to the disambiguation page it gave a reader a sense of the scope of the word "Indic." And they could choose which article to read if they had more questions.Greg Dahlen (talk) 14:29, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg Dahlen. I noticed that you recently used allstarbio.com as a source for information in a biography article, Kate Hudson. I am unable to find any evidence or discussion indicating that allstarbio.com meets reliable sourcing criteria for the inclusion of personal information in such articles. If you disagree, let's discuss it. Thanks.--Ronz (talk) 19:57, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg Dahlen! You created a thread called How do I create a reference using the "Manual" tab on Visual Editor? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KylieTastic was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Need more than one source - generally article require significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tea dances (gay event) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Tea dances (gay event), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 16:24, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Greg Dahlen! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! KylieTastic (talk) 16:24, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Greg Dahlen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Tea dances".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:37, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg - Just messaging you here to say I've commented on your draft and suggested that rather than a new page, the Tea dance information about the LGBTQ form of the event might be better incorporated onto the main Tea dance page. Take a look and please message me if you have any thoughts you'd like to share or questions. Zeromonk (talk) 15:11, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paris Hilton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eejit.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:53, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Liance was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Interviews are not independent of the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Greg Dahlen/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:Greg Dahlen/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

-Liance^{talk/contribs} 14:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Greg Dahlen. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Jack Frost (talk) 11:41, 4 October 2021 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Hi Greg Dahlen! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Can I edit a second article on my sandbox?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg Dahlen! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Can JSTOR articles be used as article references?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg Dahlen! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, can we link articles from other wikipedias?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg Dahlen! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Putting link in both infobox and first use or mention in article, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg Dahlen! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Why doesn't Billie Blair article have table of contents?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg Dahlen! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Where might be a good place to put information about dance intensives?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg Dahlen! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Can we just take an article from a non-English Wikipedia and copy it to English Wikipedia?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg Dahlen! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Can a short blurb selling a book be a source?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. Click this link to read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, you can create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Greg Dahlen! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Is it concern if draft doesn't show up in search?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. Click this link to read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, you can create a new thread. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dance Index, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DGG ( talk ) 03:10, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Greg Dahlen. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that User:Greg Dahlen/sandbox, 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) 21:28, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Greg Dahlen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:08, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Greg Dahlen. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:FlucT, 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) 15:01, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Del Nero mold house.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]