This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Your rearrangement of material and inclusion of supposed fields as "major arts" is ridiculous. If not vandalism, it was a sign of gross misunderstanding. Just because you have time to spend on the project does not mean that your contributions are beyond reproach. Research the subject - I don't expect your edits to last long. Ελληνικά όρος ή φράση (talk) 20:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on File:RiverView.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding ((hangon))
to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. IngerAlHaosului (talk) 15:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Let's back the truck up a moment shall we?
Sponsorship dollars for the sport of sailing are becoming increasingly difficult to come by, even for mainstream long-distance sailors with vessels in tip-top condition and professional/experienced crews. The LAST thing needed for the sailing community at large is for someone to advertise themselves as something they clearly were not. See the Essjay controversy, which for most of us who have been around awhile is remembered all too clearly.
In 2002, (and even as late as 16 February 2006) Stowe was actively seeking sponsorship on the premise that he/they would be undertaking a voyage that would comprise FOUR circumnavigations, perform scientific experiments etc. THIS is what sponsors were led to believe they were buying into.
About the only scientific data Stowe collected was that sails MUST be covered at all times when not in use to protect them from the damaging UV rays of the sun. However, ANY experienced sailor already knew this. There is no question whatsoever that I was one of the sailors at sailinganarchy.com ( the LARGEST online sailing website on the planet) who thought this was an ill-prepared, dangerous and foolhardy endeavour. As it turned out, the lofty goal of four trips around the marble turned out not to be possible due to the poor condition of the sails, not to mention the standing rigging which, mainly due to poor rig tune, was weakened to about a third of its designed strength. To his credit, Stowe realized this and drifted, bare-poles, for some seven months off the coast of Africa to save the rig from stress. Perhaps a survey of the sponsors who supported Stowe back in the day would reveal whether or not they felt they got the desired exposure (bang for their buck so to speak). Aloha27 (talk) 12:04, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
I agree in part with Aloha27 here. I have given a stern warning on one end, but I also warn here. It seems there is a slow edit-war going on on the page, and I have hence protected it. Discuss, also you, and reach consensus. That goes for all edits, if you do not agree with what is happening, discuss, but do not revert and revert. Try to find other knowledgeable editors to come in, as the two of you are now almost single-purpose accounts (Regatta dog for sure is, but your last 100 edits also are focussed). If necessary, go to a Wikipedia:WikiProject to find other editors who are knowledgeable, or use the page history to find others.
However, sourcing should be good there. I agree with you that the forum is not the best of sources, even from the largest online sailing website. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:54, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
I would agree with you if you applied the same rules to Reid's proponents -- "Reid Stowe or any other person should not be praised by press fed by the very people who are trying to promote his efforts". That his efforts are to "accomplish a valuable service and a commendable mission". If Mr. Stowe had been able to accomplish only a handful of his scientific and educational goals, I don't think any reasonable person would disagree with you here, but that is not the case. Could you please identify what is commendable about this so called "mission" and why it is of value? For you to make the above statement confirms your own bias toward the subject of the article.
Why do you assert that something must be "relevant to his 1000 days at sea"? Is this a biography of a person or is this an article about this particular voyage. Using your own logic, wouldn't we have to eliminate anything that does not concern the current mission including his childhood and earlier trips?
His drug smuggling and back child support were of sufficient import for the press to devote space to cover them, yet you deem them not worthy of inclusion in the article. That smells of bias.
So again, is this a bio or an article promoting a journey? Regatta dog (talk) 15:22, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Skipper Stowe.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --—fetch·comms 00:45, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Ashland, Oregon.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as ((non-free fair use in|article name)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —fetch·comms 01:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:KDAQ facilities.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as ((non-free fair use in|article name)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —fetch·comms 01:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Google results for Stowe.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --—fetch·comms 01:26, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Search on kadouri.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --—fetch·comms 01:26, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Schooner Anne.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --—fetch·comms 01:27, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Kenneth leishman.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as ((non-free fair use in|article name)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —fetch·comms 01:27, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Sso trudeau.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as ((non-free fair use in|article name)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —fetch·comms 01:29, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Skol, I think you have been involved with this users contributons and the off wiki involvement in the reporting of the issues at other blogs and such like. Would you please email me the links and off wiki contributions related to conflict of interest issues or present them at the case opened at the COI noticeboard. I have some knowledge of the history but would welcome your contributions to the discussion and the history of the conflict of interest. Feel free to comment here or on the report page Off2riorob (talk) 19:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Skipperdriving1 300.jpg, 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. Skol fir (talk) 22:12, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ken Leishman.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --ARTEST4ECHO talk 12:52, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |