Talk:Black Rock Ranger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Is this page a copyright violation?

The entire text of this page appears to be lifted en masse from this page. User:Jpettitt, do you have permission to use this text, or are you the original author? Otherwise this is a copyright violation.

There should be a page on the Rangers though.Kit 06:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I am a Ranger (call sign Trapper) - I'm checking with the powers that be on the copyright issue - if it's a problem I'll nuke the page.

Trapper

Jpettitt 05:15, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


I believe this use probably falls well within US Copyright "fair use" doctrine. Any argument there?

- Curtis Kline

Nope on two counts: 1) Wikipedia us licenced under GFDL which requires much broader rights than fair use 2) lifting a whole page goes beyond fair use norms. Like I said I'm working on getting official clearance (I don't expect a problem)

Trapper 18:41, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I think this page could use a rewrite anyway, it's entirely in the first person and needs to be written in a more information-centric tone (rather than a personal account).

uniuniunium

I gave this a major rewrite and i believe it is both no longer a copywrite violation and also a properly wikified, encyclopedic article now. Unless there are objections I believe this matter to be settled. Kit 13:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Looks great Kit, thanks for the edit Uniuniunium 03:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the complement, and you're welcome. Do we need to get an admin to delete the old, copyright violating revision in the history? Kit 03:15, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

At my request, Admin User:Jake Nelson purged the copyright violating versions of this article from the history. Unless there is an issue I am unaware of, this article is no longer a copyright violation of any kind. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 10:50, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm new here, so I'm not sure this note will show up in an appropriate place ... but --

The Rangers are the invention of one person, who deserves to be identified and credited in any discussion of the group -- just like it would be anomalous to have an entry on the lightbulb without mentioning Thomas Edison.

The Rangers website has a good discussion, for example ....


[edit] Rangers as Security or Mediation

The rewrite looks fine - I made one change to change the emphasis from security to mediation - we really don't think of ourselves as security guards ("gate & perimeter" do that)

Trapper 20:02, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I do feel that the Rangers act as event security, however, by dealing with disputes and activity disruptive to the community. However, I agree they are mediators first and security second -- can the article reflect that?
Additionally, is Gate & Perimeter not associated in any way with the Rangers? Who oversees them? Kit 22:06, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Rangers don't do security - we feel pretty strongly about it too - that's why the word security does not appear on the ranger text on the official site. I get that you feel we act as event security but in fact we are just participants whose only real authority comes from the fact people respect us. In the end it's the LEO's who do the security stuff (fights, evictions etc).
Gate and perimiter used to be part of Rangers but were spun off becuase what they do is so different - they do have an enforcement role. I'm not sure who they report too - it's not clear in any of the info I have.
I'd like to revert the text to take out security any comments before I do?
Trapper 00:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

If you feel this strongly I will bow to your feelings on the issue at least until some reason to do otherwise comes along. However, rather than revert I feel it best to remove the word security and instead add a short statement -- 1-2 sentences, explaining how the Rangers are not security -- it would seem a common misconception. Since you are passionate about this perhaps you can write the first draft of those sentences. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 15:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I made a number of edits to stress the difference between security and Rangers Trapper 19:11, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

You did a good job with this, thanks. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 07:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Trapper 00:27, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A photo

This article would definitely be improved by a picture of a Ranger in uniform. Of course it would have to be GFDL, and because of Burning Man's image restrictions (see Talk: Burning Man for this) it should be a photo taken outside of Burning Man -- the ideal would be for a Black Rock Ranger to put on his uniform just so someone could take his or her photo for the purposes of this article, therefore avoiding any hassle over the right to use images taken at Bman. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 07:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

That could be problematic - the rules say rangers may only wear uniform at official BM events and the BM copyright/logo use rules apply to those events. I'll ask around and see what I can find Trapper 00:29, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Remember if you get a photo from someone you should make it clear you will be releasing it under the GFDL although a single photo might be fair use it is not optimal. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 01:51, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
I've asked on the ranger list for a photo that the subject and photographer are willing to make public domain - we'll see if I get one Trapper 08:18, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Thank you! Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 10:01, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Done - two pics added - both GFDL Trapper 02:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Fantastic work! These make great additions to the article! Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 04:00, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Should this be at Black Rock Ranger?

Should we move this article to Black Rock Ranger? According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals), this is something of a grey area. This article refers to both the organization, the Black Rock Rangers, and but also discusses the typical Black Rock Ranger and his or her behavior.

I am inclined to believe this article should be moved. We would need admin help to move the article's history I think, since Black Rock Ranger already exists as a redirect to this page. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 10:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC) Obviously, both will continue to exist it is just a matter of which redirects to the other. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 10:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Makes sense to me as long at there is a redirect in place, I have no idea how to make the change (I could learn but I have a lot on right now) Trapper 20:49, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Neither of us can actually do the move, but I have requested that an admin take care of it. Yes, a redirect will be put in place. Incidentally, a link is already in place from the generic Ranger disambiguation page. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 04:47, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Moved. —Nightstallion (?) 08:28, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photo Captions

I reverted the changes to the photo captions that were made with the terse comment WP:NOT - the closes thing I can find under that page is a reference to removing names that are not relevant to the article. In this case I feel the names are relevant in giving context to the pictures. Feel free to disagree here Trapper 05:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I fixed the poorly worded captions to work without names. Trapper 18:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)