Talk:James v. Meow Media
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 18:14, 24 February 2006. The result of the discussion was KEEP. |
 |
James v. Meow Media is within the scope of WikiProject Kentucky, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Kentucky and related subjects in the Wikipedia. | |
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-Class on the Project's quality scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's importance scale. | |
 |
Please explain ratings on the ratings summary page. | |
[edit] Articles for Deletion debate
This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Splashtalk 19:19, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Liability
This article isn't particularly clear. I would presume that they were suggesting Meow Media etc share some liability not are solely liable. In other words, they aren't suggesting James isn't liable but that multiple parties are liable. But the article doesn't really convey this. I think this is important since these sort of things tend to be potrayed as if the people are saying James (or whoever) isn't liable when often this isn't the case. I still regard it as ridiculous as I'm sure to many others but it is important we make the distinction Nil Einne 11:16, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Meow Media?
The article doesn't mention Meow Media. From what I can gather, they're the owner of a pornography site but this isn't clear from here. Nil Einne 14:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
