Knowledgy

License tagging for Image:Sensatio.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sensatio.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Your acticle on Sensatio (re: your question on the Newcomer's Help Desk)

Hi there! First of all, I want to thank you for your positive attitude, please don't be discouraged! :) I'll try to explain why your article was put up for deletion (which doesn't automatically means it will be deleted! It just means that other editors have a chance to read it and decide whether they think it should be included in Wikipedia). Please understand that we get many, many very short, very badly written articles (which yours is not) with the sole purpose of advertising a product, company, software etc. These sorts of articles are among the most irritating contributions to Wikipedia, so please forgive us if we're occasionally a bit harsher than we should be with well-intentioned articles, as we have to deal with enormous piles of detritus every day.

One of the difficulties in writing Wikipedia is to decide what to include, and on this issue there are many points of view amongst editors. On the one hand, we don't want Wikipedia to become an overbloated repository of useless information (if you ask me, our eighty-plus articles on fictional robots from an anime series is borderline), on the other hand, the stated goal of Wikipedia is to provide as much access as possible to as much of human knowledge as possible. We call this Notability - our Wikipedia page on Notability summarises the positions pretty well. A good test for notability is "does subject X have a relevance or importance, or is it well well known, outside of its immediate field of application?".

Now, if you consider that there are literally millions of different pieces of software out there (especially following the rise of the Internet and the open source movement - just look at what's on SourceForge), most of which are half-completed (if at all) and rarely used by anyone except their creators, I think you'll agree it doesn't make sense to have an article on every single one! The problem, of course, is where to draw the line. This is an endless discussion amongst Wikipedia editors, and even there is no one good solution, there are several tests that can be run (see Wikipedia:List of ways to verify notability of articles) to determine how well-known any given subject is. If I check on Google, I find very few links to Sensatio, which, in my opinion (especially as it's a piece of software) indicates that it's neither widespread nor well-known. Also, on a personal note, I find the supposed benefits it offers straining credulity and bordering on snake oil (however, I have no formal training in this particular area of science).

I'm not advocating any point of view here, I'm just trying to explain how some of the things work on Wikipedia. No matter what happens to Sensatio, I very much hope that you won't be discouraged and continue to edit here! :) If you're looking for slightly easier ways of getting into Wikipedia, look around the Community portal, under "Open tasks" (halfway down, on the right) to see some articles in need of attention.

As for a "bad score", Wikipedia has nothing of the sort! :) You are never penalised for writing something which is later deleted or modified (unless it's vandalism - but I very much doubt that will ever apply to you!). While other users can check your list of contributions to see where else you have contributed, it is strongly encouraged to judge each edit and article on its own merits rather than on the user's history (except in the case of nonstop vandals, such as users who do nothing but add nonsense to random articles - again, this isn't you!). So, no, on the contrary, I've seen that you participate actively and in good faith in the community, which is a definite plus! Keep it up :)

As always, if you want to discuss this or for anything else, feel free to leave a message on my talk page! Hope you'll stay with us! — QuantumEleven | (talk) 07:19, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Sensatio

hi Knowledgy -- I'm sorry to have put your article up for deletion, but I really don't think it fits in wikipedia. and I'm sorry that someone referred to it as "spam". try not to take it personally. QuantumEleven (above) has already explained a lot about the deletion process. I will just say that wikipedia has strict ideas about notability of things for which we write articles about (including some suggestions for notability of software). very very often, new people come and try to write an article promoting their band/product/website when it doesn't meet those standards. wikipedia editors tend not to have very much patience for that situation, because we see it many times every day, and refer to it as "vanity" or "spam". but it's nothing personal, and I hope you'll stick around and contribute to other articles! best, bikeable (talk) 14:11, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Sensatio.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Sensatio.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 02:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)