User talk:Ungoliant13

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I want to download the internet. Do I need a bigger hard disk?


Ground Rules For Playing In My Sandbox...


  1. I am an editor, but am not an admin. I did not delete or block your page or article. That being said, I may have suggested or urged deletion of them.
  2. I cannot undelete your page/article, nor can I unblock you.
  3. If you wish to leave messages for me here, please post at the bottom of the page and "sign" your posts.
  4. Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.


Thanks. --Ungoliant, because I'm cool like that. And 13, on accounta Triskaidekaphobia.

[edit] List of novelists from the United States

Notability for inclusion on the list is somewhat different from notability for inclusion in Wikipedia. Have you looked at the criteria on the Talk page? Myself, I don't see why Heck is any more important than the scores of little-known horror writers out there who may have some admirers among fans of the genre but are otherwise indistinguishable. If, after looking at the criteria, you honestly think Heck is one of the landmark horror novelists of our time (with, it looks like, only two published novels to his credit, and both issued just this year) and unjustly neglected by the mainstream, then go ahead and add him back.

Of course, I wrote the list criteria, and I'm talking as if I own the list—which I don't, although I seem to be the only one who cares about it... (Lists like this are on the way out, anyway—it'll all be Categories soon.)--ShelfSkewed [Talk] 20:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I should probably come up with a different word--using notability in two different contexts is confusing. Anyway, if you are well versed in American horror literature, I encourage you to go through the list and add any novelists not on it that you do think fit the criteria, and kick off any that you think are unworthy or marginal. I did my best when I cleaned up the list, but I'm not a horror expert. --ShelfSkewed [Talk] 04:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Victor heck.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Victor heck.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. • Anakin (contribs • complaints) 13:58, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Victor heck in 1997.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Victor heck in 1997.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 19:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, well the copyright tag is supposed to be on the image page for the image, not in the article using the image. Also in this case the image page only stated:
“ Photo taken by Kim Anderson. David Nordhaus is the copyright holder. Ungoliant13 (talk) 19:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC) ”
Wich is a good start, but doesn't explain how "Ungoliant13" have the rights to release the image under the GFDL license. Are "Ungoliant13" and David Nordhaus the same person? Also why is David the copyright holder if Kim took the photo etc. Basicaly there needs to be enough information on the image page to determine where an image came from and that the person/entity that own the rights to the image have agreed to release the image under the license represented by the choosen copyright tag template. Hope that helps. --Sherool (talk) 23:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)