Talk:Love Me Tender (song)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
 |
This article is part of the Elvis Presley WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in systematically organizing all the information in Wikipedia related to the "The King of Rock 'n' Roll". This project's focus is to centralize the efforts of many Wikipedians to make Wikipedia the best free resource when it comes to information about the subject.
If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the Project's importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] writing credit
Does it make sense for us to credit Presley and Matson if it's undisputed that Darby (and Poulton) are the true authors? Or is it our policy to have our "writers" credit reflect the copyright credits? --Allen 01:28, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Lovemetenderelvissingle.jpg
Image:Lovemetenderelvissingle.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Richardchamberlainlovemetender.jpg
Image:Richardchamberlainlovemetender.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] some paragraphs
The material about Presley getting co-writing credits on other songs, and this happening in general is very interesting, but I think it belongs in another article. It could be expanded into an article itself, even. Bubba73 (talk), 20:45, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
