Hi, The reason for doing that was to put the notice at the section where it applies i.e. the article needed the "Bibliography" section to be merged as footnotes, so I put the notice at the bibliography sectoin. Then I noticed that the Bibliography could just be merged into the "References" section so I did that too. Sorry for not making my edits clear. Thanks --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 10:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, yes I see what yoy mean. I have moved it back to the top of the article. I will add a more specific one which points out that the "Notes" need to be incorporated into the actual text to the bottom. Thanks --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 11:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Ebay xkcd bobcat.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note; I'll try to explain my reasoning. The text was removed as would be any material found to match a copyrighted online source. The YouTube thing seemed not very relevant, and the Henry Art Gallery did not seem to meet guidelines at WP:EL: "Links normally to be avoided" include "Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article." This link does not provide very much information at all on Rodchenko, although as a complement to our rather meager Wikipedia article it certainly adds something of value.

WP requires that the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License be met whenever any copyrighted work is placed into an article (see WP:ERP, for instance the sections "What not to ask permission for" and "Declaration of consent for all enquiries"). Not being a lawyer, I don't know if the permission you've placed in the text satisfies the rules, but I doubt it, and if I don't remove your edit, somebody else may. Probably the soundest approach would be to rewrite the section in your own words, retaining the Rodchenko quote and the citation to Henry Art Gallery. Ewulp (talk) 02:28, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]