The article has been deleted as a result of this debate: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Fullerton. Some users suggested that the page be moved into your user space. If you would like me to do this, then just ask me and I can undelete the page in order to complete the move. You can also request to view the content at deletion review or ask one of these admins if I'm not around. --bainer (talk) 12:25, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be possible to do so? Thanks.

Is it also possible to know why exactly you believed the article on Fullerton should have been deleted. I understand there was quite a consensus for deletion but a lot of this was due to the negative image as a result of the invasion of trolls who had nothing to do with me. I could hazard a guess that they were probably excitable pupils of Fullerton's who got word that he was on the site. When sources and evidence were produced they were ignored and overshadowed by the negative impact of the invasion. I went to quite an effort to find books which dealt with Fullerton in detail but this effort and the sources I provided seemed to be completely ignored. --Johnfullerton 01:20, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can now find the page at User:Johnfullerton/John Fullerton. Be advised that other people have edited this page, so if you plan on using the content elsewhere, you need to follow the obligations for users in Wikipedia:Copyrights, or alternatively use only this version which you alone contributed to.

Regarding the AfD debate, the job of the closing admin is merely to implement the decision of the community, not to judge whether it is correct or not. It seems that people didn't think that Fullerton satisfied the notability guidelines for people, or that the sources you provided were not verifiable. St Columb's website, for example, only showed winners of the Alumnus Illustrissimus up to 2003. This site showed that Fullerton is a coach, but did not verify any of the other details. I'd advise that (after waiting a few weeks) you gather all the references you can, prepare selected quotes from them, cite the sources, maybe use the citation templates, and start the article again, with the references in there from the start and with perhaps a little less glorious language. Make it sound less like a vanity page. Unfortunately there's a bias towards internet sources, and since Google turned up nothing relevant, people may have not trusted your book references. However if they're there from the start, it should be easier for you to prove that it's verifiable.

Also note that it's generally considered bad form to blank your talk page; if you want to archive the content, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. --bainer (talk) 06:29, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Fullerton1.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 08:51, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Fullertoninpastandpresent.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:

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 00:50, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you're not the John Fullerton the article is about, could you please remove the content from your main user page, as otherwise it will lead to obvious confusion. The article in question was userfied to a subpage, as is usual, but by you putting it on the main page, it could easily be seen as trying to get around the deletion decision and "publishing" the article anyway. Regards, MartinRe 15:52, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your lies have caught up with you. Please see the WP:DRV page. User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please review our policy on NPOV. User:Zoe|^(talk) 00:04, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please don't reupload images after they have been deleted for having bad license information and place {{PD-self}} on them. It's annoying to delete the same image repeatedly, and there are enough images in the deletion queue to keep us busy without further additions. Thanks. Jkelly 23:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John, I feel it is in very poor form that you decided to remove the article about Darren Kelly in order to replace it with Darren Kelly the footballer. Darren Kelly the radio presenter presents on one of the biggest stations in the country, with a weekly audience of 800,000. The other Darren Kelly is an obscure footballer playing in Northern Ireland.

I see you reinserted very unencyclopedic content on the Derry City F.C. article. You surely can't believe that this should be there? ie

I was curious as to why you think it should be there? It does seems like you are either 'taking the piss' or you are mis-reading the purpose of Wikipedia. You can answer here on on my talk page or the Derry City page, up to you. Kind regards SeanMack 12:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you create an inappropriate page such as Ray Boyce, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. . You should not create articles accusing people of pedophilia without providing sources. NawlinWiki 15:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When creating articles, please don't forget to add categories and stub tags. Thank you, Punkmorten 18:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not post nonsense on my discussion page, especially when you don't even bother to explain the comments.

Hi there, you're doing a great job with the Derry City FC articles, but can you please read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 21:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have deleted Image:Derrypsg.jpg as a blatant copyright infringement and clearly incorrectly tagged. You tagged the photo as "PD self", in essence saying you took the photo and have released it into the public domain. However the photo has a clear "C.Gavelle" at the bottom of, this is the name of someone who is a staff photographer with PSG. You downloaded the photo from http://www.allpsg.com/news-3769.html.

I am also concerned that Image:Derry.jpg is inappropriately tagged and has simply downloaded off a website. Again you have tagged it "PD self" - can you prove this by uploading a higher resolution (or original size) version?

Please have a careful read of WP:IUP and WP:TAGS, as this seems to be a reoccurring problem.

Thanks/wangi 12:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have now deleted Image:Derry.jpg. Thanks/wangi 15:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted a number of images you have uploaded that were blatant copyright violations. Most of these were taken from http://www.derrycityfc.net/squad.php. Please note that simply because you copy an image from a website, and slightly modify it, change size, whatever...the image does not become "yours" to release. The original creator of the image retains rights. For example, you can't take the logo for Coca-Cola, change the color slightly, and then make a million t-shirts for sale with that 'new' logo on it. The lawyers for Coca-Cola would be at your door very rapidly. Please do not claim self-authorship of another image if you take that image from a website. If you have any questions about this, I'd be happy to answer. Thanks, --Durin 14:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Foyle Harps, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable. If you can indicate why Foyle Harps is really notable, you can contest the tagging. To do this, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and leave a note on Talk:Foyle Harps, explaining how Foyle Harps is notable. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

Please read the criteria for speedy deletion (specifically, article #7) and our general biography criteria. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Bubba hotep 23:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can find no evidence of Terry Phelan ever signing for Derry City. Can you provide a source for this assertion? Oldelpaso 17:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not re-add this paragraph without providing a citation. Per the policy on Biographies of living persons, unsourced contentious statements about living people are not permitted. Oldelpaso 10:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Don'tpressbutton

I reckon that good old Jobby Crossan and Jon "Ug" Clifford deserve some limelight - they are after all notable guys... Ryannus 23:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Thing is, did Ug even play, I mean, he is rather...big and Ug-esque. Ryannus 01:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Tigi catwalk.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it was designed by a pupil of St.Columb's College! Ryannus 23:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to John "Jobby" Crossan. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Demiurge 10:48, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you think that recreation of the John Fullerton article will be allowed to stand? If you recreate it again, you will be blocked from editing. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This says otherwise. And then your sock puppet recreated it today. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leave the man alone for gawd sake. Just because he's a teacher doesn't mean it's fair to write what you do about him - even if it is on your own user page. Cheers! SeanMack 12:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading Image:DColdcrest.gif. 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. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 02:25, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Civilian.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 06:29, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Tigicatwalk.gif. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 11:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]