User talk:TMNTOM

Welcome!

Hello, TMNTOM, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like The Music Network, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ttonyb (talk) 00:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of The Music Network

A tag has been placed on The Music Network 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 clear 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. ttonyb (talk) 00:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright and "The Music Network"

You posted a query to the talk page of the article The Music Network. I have made a reply there, but, in case by any chance the page should get deleted before you find it, I am copying both your query and my reply here. I hope I have clarified matters for you. Please feel welcome to contact em on my talk page if you have anything else to ask about this. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why the two articles that have been sited prove any kind of 'violation' of copyright. The first article is on the website that is the company in question. The second page is an artist's page referencing the chart that this article discusses. If anything, I feel these pages justify the need for this article to be here. The magazine that this article is about has the the most referenced radio airplay chart in Australia. Can someone explain the problem? TMNTOM (talk) 13:24, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above post seems to be written by someone who does not understand what the word "copyright" means. If somebody writes something then they have the right to decide who can use what they have written and how. (The exact legal position is more complicated, with various ifs and buts, but that is the basic idea.) Wikipedia licenses its content under very broad terms, allowing anyone to reuse the material in a wide range of circumstances. The copyright in the material which has been copied into this article belongs to the authors of that material, unless they have assigned the copyright to someone else. The owners of the copyright may or may not be happy for their work to be republished on Wikipedia page; even if they are, they may or may not be happy for their work to be made available for anyone and everyone else to use fairly freely. If they are happy for this to happen then it is up to them to tell us that it is so. As long as they have not done so cannot assume that they are happy for that to happen, and we cannot legally reproduce their work here.

It is worth also mentioning one other fact. It is common for editors who are new to Wikipedia to introduce a new article, see it deleted for copyright reasons, and then spend some effort on rewriting the article avoiding breaching copyright, only to see the article deleted for other reasons. To avoid the risk of this happening I strongly urge anyone who may think of rewriting this article to read Wikipedia's notability guideline, as I think this might still be deleted as non-notable if it were not deleted for copyright infringement. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:13, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]