Signpostmaker

Image copyright problem with Image:Cupping1h.JPG

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Cupping1h.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 21:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Cupping1.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Cupping1.JPG. The copy called Image:Cupping1.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 21:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Cupping1h.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Cupping1h.JPG. The copy called Image:Cupping1h.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 22:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:Cupping1g.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Cupping1g.JPG. The copy called Image:Cupping1g.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 22:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree images

Several images that you uploaded or altered have been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because their copyright status is disputed. If the images' copyright status cannot be verified, they may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description pages:

• Cupping1 006.jpg
• Cupping1c.JPG
• Cupping1.jpg
• Bloodcellscupping.jpg
• Cupping1h.jpg
• Cupping1g.jpg

You are welcome to add comments to the appropriate entries at the discussion if you are interested in their not being deleted. Thank you. - ∅ (∅), 15:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Copyrighted material

Hi, please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See also our policy on sources and external links. Thanks! :-) - ∅ (∅), 18:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Fire Cupping

Sorry for taking so long in getting back to you. I am sorry, but I am not the best person to help here. For a start, I am not an administrator, I am but a lowly user who spends a bit of time every day checking recent changes and undoing vandalism. In other words, I have no powers to block, punish, chasten or anything else like that. Secondly, I know nothing about fire-cupping, so I wouldn't know what facts are correct or not on the article or from the removed material. What I can say is that the administrators have checked your claims of vandalism against the user I do not exist, and they appear to be satisfied that what the user undid was valid.

I doubt that what I have said is sufficient to satisfy you. You do appear to be genuinely aggreved about this other user. My advice is as follows: Firstly, I would suggest that you take a critical look yourself at the edits you did, and ask yourself the following questions:

1) Is what I added relevant to that article? Really relevant. I mean that it is so absolutely tied in with the article, that to put it in a different article would be silly.

2) Did I add something that is classed as original research? Is it something that I believe to be true, or are there valid sources that I can refer to?

3) If there are sources, are these sources valid? Am I linking to someones blog, someone's opinion, or is it valid research that I am linking to. Does it explicitly state the fact that I have added to Wikipedia?

Should you be satisfied that you have added valid material , then discuss it on the talk page. Don't just edit it into the article, state what you want to amend, and cite the sources. Don't just keep adding and adding it to the article main page, or you will find yourself violating the three revert rule (i.e. 3 identical reverts in 24 hours and you run the risk of being blocked). Please remember to:

1) Assume good faith on all the other parties (i.e. don't automatically assume they are all vandals) 2) be civil (it is so easy to post something nasty in the heat of the moment)

If discussion on the talk page does nothing, then I suggest you check Wikipedia:Mediation, and get an administrator involved. With luck, it won't come to that.

Good luck! StephenBuxton (talk) 10:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Adding signatures

Just a little request: When you add a comment in a talk page (user or article), can you please remember to sign your comments? It is easy enough to do - just add 4 tilde symbols "~" at the end of your comments. Alternatively, if you click on the icon above the edit box that looks like a signature ( should be 10th icon from the left, next to the icon that looks like a "w" in a red circle with a red line through it) - this will add the signature for you. By leaving your signature, it makes it easier for those who want to reply to you (perhaps on your talk page) identify who it was without having to search through the page's edit history.

Thanks! StephenBuxton (talk) 12:34, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Film spam

The film is not yet made and has not received funding so may never get made. I did not see the comments on the talk page and it still looks like spam, especially as the intention is do drive visitors of Wikipedia to the site and help with making the film. The section adds nothing whatsoever to the articles. As to your comment "Please let experts in the field of cupping discuss this issue and decide if this pro active non-profit effort deserves some attention." This is Wikipedia and anybody is free to edit. So I can edit it without being an expert. 23:08, 28 February 2010 (UTC)