Were you givern permission to release material the college held the copyright on under the GFDL? Further more wikipedia articless do not exist in order to promote things (see WP:NPOV).Geni 13:04, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I was, The article which I created "promoted" the College by purely stating facts. By replacing the article you have left what can surely be considered nonsense. You have left an article which has no minimal truth in it and is extremely offensive.

To chose a random example " The night is coupled with what can only be considered an exotic meal prepared by the international members of the College community."

No source for the claim that "can only be considered an exotic meal" indeed unless it is composed of non baryonic matter it would appear unlikely that it could not be described useing words other than "an exotic meal". You have no answered the copyright issues.Geni 00:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That physics joke isn't necessary. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's no source because I used a commonly used description- would you like me to reference that as myself? It seems that you are clutching at straws....the meal is exotic because it is representative of a variety of international cultures. However, for your information I have provided a definition of the term exotic...

Exotic: of foreign origin or character; not native; introduced from abroad, but not fully naturalized or acclimatized: exotic foods; exotic plants.

Please consult the Oxford English Dictionary if you wish to verify this...

I do not appreciate what you are doing. It appears that you are being petty and childish. I will be taking up the matter further

Until you answer the copyright issues there is little point in continueing this conversation.Geni 02:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain what the copyright issues are.... without simply dismssing me

I also stated that I was given permission, as a student of the College, to use the pictures which I used

You did not have permission to release them under a free lisence. The other copyright issues is that you dirrectly coppied text from the collage's site. the collage hold the copyright on that text and is unlikely to have released it undr a free lisence.Geni 03:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aaah No I did not- please provide proof of this copying of evidence from the college website- the college has disclose some of the photographs for use by the general public- if you have an issue with this please confer with them 61 8 8290 6000

To chose a random example the "administration" section was taken from http://www.adelaide.edu.au/lincoln/about/administration.html . I can't copmment on the freeness of the photos without seing the exact wording of the lisence they are under (although they are unliekly to be free).Geni 04:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And as stated I was gievn permission to use this- please contact Lincoln College administration and see if this is not the case 61 8 8290 6000.

Permission to use is not permission to put on wikipedia

Actually, I have been given permission by Lincoln College- please contact them on 61 8 82906000. It appears that you are an extremely sad individual with too much time on your hands please go find somehting more worthwhile to do with your time.

There are plenty of articles on Wikipedia which in their entireity use information directly from webpages- I site the article on Ralph Townsend. However, I don't see that being deleted by you.

If the page is not reverted further action will be taken....

IS that your only example?

You know it isn't. For example the "Learning Resources" section was coppied from http://www.adelaide.edu.au/lincoln/resources/

Furthermore, you are only entitile to remove sections which you believe could be in void copyright. The removal of other sections is considered vandalism i have been advised.

Then you have been advised wrong. I can remove versions contianing copyvio material.Geni 12:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll take a look and see what's salvageable from the stuff that Geni censored. I go to Adelaide Uni too. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much- it's greatly appreciated

FYI- Letter on Behalf Lincoln Students

Dear Sir/Mam, Due to your unfounded and highly unneccessary vandalism of the Lincoln College entry on Wikipedia, the College Council and we have deemed it necessary to delete the Lincoln College listing on Wikipedia.

We enlisted a fellow student to revise the page and are made to understand that this work was undertaken in good faith over Monday 18th and Tuesday 19th December. It was subsequently deleted by you over the same period and replaced with information that was both inflammatory and untrue.

The fact that you have wished to disregard the explanations of the student who altered the page has led us to delete the page whilst further action is taken. We will be incontact with the Wikifoundation and if necessary legal action will by undertaken by the Lincoln College Club Pty Ltd.

Further information may be sought by you by contacting the College on 61 8 8290 6000

The Student Body of Lincoln College

Thanks for uploading Image:Lincoln College Logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Adelaide Oval.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:The_Annexe_Building.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]