User talk:Technicalglitch

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Technicalglitch, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Here are a few more good links to help you get started:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:52, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Please email me. Important. I am the attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation. Re: Samuels --BradPatrick 19:52, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

1 Raymond Samuels
2 Airports
3 License tagging for Image:Pangnirtung-airport-interior.jpg
4 License tagging for Image:Pangnirtung-school.jpg
5 Samuels lawsuit
6 I have noticed you recently stopped providing edit summaries. Please resume proving them. We need them.
7 Hyperlinks
8 Image:Igloolik-stonechurch.jpg
9 Image:Igloolik.jpg

[edit] Raymond Samuels

I've just posted this to the Samuels discussion page:

After adding semi-protection yesterday, I decided to remove certain contentious information from the article. I should now explain why I made this decision.

It was not intended as "appeasement". Samuels's comical legal threats do not merit attention or response, and they certainly should not dictate the content of this article.

My edits were rather intended as a temporary, precautionary measure: to ensure that all of the procedural "i"s were dotted and "t"s crossed before arriving at a finalized wording on these matters. It's possible that I was being overly cautious -- and, in fact, I'm inclined to think that I erred to far on the side of discretion.

Nonetheless, there was a logical motivation behind my actions. In recent times, a number of far-right individuals in Canada have successfully complained to the Wikimedia Foundation to have information removed from their pages. (There were difficulties with sourcing in one particular case, with the result that the page in question was effectively blanked by Jimbo Wales until reliable sources could be found.)

I have no desire of seeing Mr. Samuels make a successful complaint to the Foundation, and I don't intend to give him any grounds on which to pursue such a case. If this means taking down information for a day or two until procedural matters can be resolved, I'm prepared to take that step.

I had intended to bring the issue of the court transcripts up for general discussion today. I've always had reservations about including these in the article, largely because the source documents are not widely available, and their usage seemed to border on original research. I have little doubt that the information is accurate, and my opinion is that it is also relevant -- I simply wanted to have further discussions on the matter.

However, in light of TechnicalGlitch's addition of citations, I am not inclined to press the matter further. The material is both sourced and relevant, and so should remain.

I should clarify that I have no hesitation in believing TG's side of the story. Her contributions to this discussion have been extremely valuable, the exact opposition of Mr. Samuels's approach. (And I know that I promised not to delete the court references again ... apologies. As I said, it was just a temporary precaution this time).

I had similar concerns about the names, but these have also been resolved.

Sometimes, the bad guys can eke out a victory. I'm trying to ensure that doesn't happen this time. CJCurrie 23:38, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for adding the citations. CJCurrie 23:57, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Airports

I was still in Holman in 1994, working at the airport. I hope you hve some better shots of the Holman terminal as out of several thousand pictures that was the only one I had. It would be good too if you had a short of the old Cambridge Bay terminal. You can also add pictures to the infobox but without a caption which means that sometimes an explanation is needed in the text. Use {{Airport image|airport_image=Cambridge Bay terminal.JPG|}} and it goes right under the airport title. I had the time and the access to the Canadian Flight Supplement so I thought I would add them all. I've noticed that having done so they have been added to. I think it's great and was surprised as I really didn't think any of the really small ones would grow in any way. Because I am using NAVCANADA for the airport names I find that sometimes the local community has a different name for the airport and I don't always get the community served right. Don't worry about "messing" them up as they are not mine and I just wanted to get them put in. The only real thing that should go with each airport is the box. Then lead off with all official/local names followed by the IATA/ICAO codes. A good place to look for the info on the style is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Pangnirtung-airport-interior.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Pangnirtung-airport-interior.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:06, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Pangnirtung-school.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Pangnirtung-school.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

[edit] Samuels lawsuit

Hello,

Unfortunately, I came to the conclusion that the material was in contravention of Wikipedia:Biographies of Living Persons. As a general rule, primary source documents of this sort need to be mentioned by secondary sources before they can be included in Wikipedia biographies of living persons.

This rule was not clarified last February (when I expanded the Samuels page), but is commonly accepted now. I would have preferred to leave the reference in, but I've regretably reached the conclusion that Wikipedia isn't the place for it. Sorry. CJCurrie 04:09, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I won't stand in your way if you want to return the passage. I just don't believe you'll have very much luck with it.

This is the relevant section of BLP:

Non-public figures Wikipedia also contains biographies of people who, while notable enough for an entry, are nevertheless entitled to the respect for privacy afforded non-public figures. In such cases, editors should exercise restraint and include only information relevant to their notability. Material from primary sources should generally not be used unless it has first been mentioned by a verifiable secondary source.

Unfortunately, I think that Samuels would fall into this category.

I have no personal animosity toward you, and I'll repeat that I would have preferred to leave the reference in. My "sorry" was serious, not flippant. CJCurrie 04:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

My understanding is that a "secondary source" in this context would refer to a newspaper report, a reference in an academic journal, or something similar. I don't suppose the Ottawa Citizen or Ottawa Sun ever mentioned the case? CJCurrie 01:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I have noticed you recently stopped providing edit summaries. Please resume proving them. We need them.

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Will (Talk - contribs) 05:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hyperlinks

It turns out that Samuels's own "Anzwers" page was the blacklisted hyperlink. It's gone now. CJCurrie 23:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Igloolik-stonechurch.jpg

Hi. When you uploaded Image:Igloolik-stonechurch.jpg, you did not specify complete source and copyright information. Another user subsequently tagged it with {{GFDL-presumed}} and, for some time, it has existed on Wikipedia under the assumption that you created the image and you agreed to license it under the GFDL. This assumption, however well-meaning, is not legally sufficient and the tag is being phased out. Images using it are being deleted.

This image has been tagged for deletion and will be deleted in one week if adequate copyright information is not provided.

If you, personally, are the author of this content, meaning that you took the photograph yourself or you created the chart yourself (and it does not use any clipart that you did not create), please retag the image with a free image copyright tag that correctly describes your licensing intentions, usually {{GFDL-self}} or {{PD-self}}. Please also make sure if you have not already done so that you write a good description of what the image depicts, when you took the photo, and other important details. This will allow Wikipedia to continue using the image.

If you did not create the image or if it is derived from the copyrighted works of others, please keep in mind that most images on the internet are copyrighted and are not suitable for use on Wikipedia. Wikipedia respects the copyrights of others and does not use images unless we know that they have been freely licensed. Any creative work is automatically copyrighted, even if it lacks a copyright notice. Unless the copyright holder has specifically disclaimed their rights to the image and released it under the GFDL or another compatible license, we cannot use it. If you did not create the image, and cannot make the image compliant with Wikipedia:Non-free content, simply do nothing and it will be deleted in a week. All other non-free images must follow these rules.

Please feel free to contact me on my talk page or leave a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions with any questions you may have. Thank you. Aksibot 22:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Igloolik.jpg

Hi. When you uploaded Image:Igloolik.jpg, you did not specify complete source and copyright information. Another user subsequently tagged it with {{GFDL-presumed}} and, for some time, it has existed on Wikipedia under the assumption that you created the image and you agreed to license it under the GFDL. This assumption, however well-meaning, is not legally sufficient and the tag is being phased out. Images using it are being deleted.