I regret that I must inform you that your request for the rollback permission has been denied You can discover why by checking the archives at WikipediaRequests for permissionsDeniedJanuary Mikaey     Joseph Stalin My text wasnt edited it was reversed  I was trying to improve the article by removing POV and making neater summaries   Look further back at my edit history and youll see my edits were heavy rewrites to flimsy sections not reverts done to annoy people  Also nobody else has really done anything substantial for this article for quite some time  In the months Ive been working on it other writers have only been adding snippets or links   So if I added extensive justifications to my edits they might pass  People complain that this article is biased and Im trying to FIX that  Also I replaced the lead image of Stalin with a photograph but Tocino thinks the previous painting is better  A painting especially a flattering one made for propaganda is inferior to an actual photograph especially on as sharp as the one Ive put in you can even see his pockmarks    Hello I have made sure that I have not violated the RR rule because I have been suspended for this in the past I have waited patiently for a day to pass before I could add the better more famous image of Stalin which was on the article before Kurzon came along Unfortunately Kurzon has taken a different tactic and in the past couple of hours he has reverted three times without an edit summary to two different editors     Late Bloomer   I came across the AfD on Late bloomer which seems interesting  worth keeping but had no references They are not really needed since it is a summarytype article with links to fullyreferenced articles on the people mentioned but I started doing the mechanical job of adding references Then I saw your note that the article seems to have degraded from earlier versions In what way Dont want to continue adding refs if an earlier version would be a better starting point      Query about an official page   Hi Mikaey  Yesterday I attempted to post a page on here on behalf of an organisation for which I am currently working as an intern FDC Only problem was that we have a specific and official way of saying things which happens to be that of the website and several primary so I just referenced there In your review you stated We cannot accept copyrighted content taken from web sites or printed sources There are several similar nonprofit organisations which have pages on Wikipedia with their official statements published too I was just wondering if copyright still applies when you are the authorised party Is there any way I can have this article published without changing the words away from our official statement Also if I just change the words briefly so it is different from the website but still conveys the message of our organisational profile can it then be published  Any help would be much appreciated as I am pretty stuck with where to go on this Thank you so much in advance      The user here is talking about this page from the AfC queue  I declined it because at least one section About the FDC seemed to be a wordforword copy from their website  Notwithstanding any other issues with this article would someone like to weigh in on the issue of the texts copyright status  If the organization agrees to let the text be published under the GFDL would he be good  Thanks    If the organization releases the text as GFDL through an OTRS email there should be no problem with the copyrights but the article as a whole has too much WPCOI and how they wrote their phone numbers and email addresses looks spamy The article dosent say anything about notability of the company either Oh you were asking only about copyrightssorry An OTRS email would be sufficient The relevant guide for getting the permissions is here UserUnpopular Opinion