"

Fair use disputed for Image:Image:Devilina2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Image:Devilina2.jpg. 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. 

 Marvel Database Project 

Please stop
As others have noted on this page, Wikipedia disallows links to other wikis, such as the Marvel Database Project. Please see the guidelines at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Examples, which state, among things, ""Wikis, including Wikipedia and other wikis sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation are not regarded as reliable sources.""   

Hello Tenebrae,
Thank you for leaving me a message about this Wikipedia policy.
In the same spirit as Wikipedia, I believe that the Marvel Database Project is indeed a reliable source. As an aside, I see dozens of links to Marvel.com's wiki, as well. Their wiki is far less complete, and on the whole I believe less accurate.
I request you reconsider the removal of those links as they contain valid and relevant additional information. At the least, I ask that we discuss this topic with other Wikipedia members, as I believe there would be support from other members of the Comics Wikiproject.
Would you consider further discussion?
Kind regards,
 

I completely agree.  If you'll notice, they aren't using the Wiki as a SOURCE; they're saying ""If you 're interested in more info than the Godawful 'notability' policy lets us post, go here.""  Even on official policy pages they mention that you should throw up a link to an external fanwiki (look how many times Wookieepedia is mentioned in official thingies).  I'm going to readd the link on, because it's in my Watchlist, the Hobgoblin page, and I *will* take it to an admin if I have to.  
Right here:   Also note that Palpatine, a FEATURED ARTICLE, has a link to the Wookieepedia.  Final Fantasy VI, another featured article, has a link to the FF Wiki.  And so on.  If this practice was frowned upon, those would have been sliced out before they got FA status.  They didn't.   
Because it's not against effing policy to have them as LINKS.  And I don't care who originally put them there.  At any rate, I've raised the question here: Wikipedia_talk:Reliable_sources/Examples so let's see what they say.  
Apologies; I've gotten to the point where I don't consider that ""language,"" especially as I was using it a substitute for a word I WOULD consider uncivil. ;) For what it's worth, use any language you like on mine. )  

Aquaman Dispute
Hello, Tenebrae. I was referred to you by fellow WikiProject Comics member  to see if you may be able to assist in a dispute over the Aquaman article. You see, I was under the impression that they wished me to create a separate page for the new incarnation of the character, Arthur Joseph Curry. When I created the page, other users illustrated to me that I had misunderstood them and reacted in a very hostile manner. I then stood behind my decision for the split when Maple Leaf brought to my attention that the Aquaman article itself was relatively large by normal article standards. A user then reverted the change and re-merged the articles, regardless of the glaring size issue.

I would appreciate your input and assistance in this manner. The main discussion is happening on the talk page for the Aquaman article, and your intervention as a respect