User talk:Sdauson

George W. Bush

I reverted your edit to George W. Bush. Here's my edit summary: saying that his appointments are insignificant is a bit POV. Its about him being the first Republican to appoint gays, not how many gays he has appointed compared to Clinton, etc.

I do not mean to sound hostile, but please keep in mind its an article about Bush, rather than an article of how Bush compares to Clinton. Thanks, Redwolf24 22:22, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

[1] How's that? :) Redwolf24 22:37, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:Redwolf24#George Bush Edits. Redwolf24 22:50, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Replied again. Redwolf24 23:00, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you continue to make these inane edits to articles about "first republican to nominate a black justice", etc, just to make a point on an unrelated article, they will be reverted. Deal with it on George W. Bush, don't spread it around. --Golbez 20:16, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

I don't see why it's a huge milestone that a Republican nominated a black man. Gay, much more so, but I personally don't think I would include that sentence - but no one's trying to make a point by keeping it there. My main gripe with this is that you are losing a disagreement on one article, so you're trying to make a point on other articles, attempting to point out how inane the original gay comment is, I suppose. Two wrongs don't make a right. --Golbez 20:53, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

The thing is, most Republicans don't see the nomination of Clarence Thomas as very significant. It goes right along with them being against Affirmative Action; GWHB chose the best man for the job, regardless of his race. In this case, the best man for the job was black. I do not vote against it in the survey because I don't care enough about it; I would not have added it, but I'm not about to go removing it either. What I do care about is, since you think having the line in that article lowers the quality of the article, you are on a crusade to lower the quality of other articles (in your own estimation), which is what is meant by WP:POINT. Do you see the logical error in your reasoning? --Golbez 21:20, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, if Roberts were gay, that would be worth noting, Democrat or Republican. Thomas, not so much. Just my opinion. --Golbez 21:38, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Expanding my comments - being black to a Republican, or female to a Democrat, doesn't mean much. Being gay means a very very very much lot. So mentioning that makes more sense than mentioning the other. And consistency matters less than individual article quality. --Golbez 21:49, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Was being black 15 years ago any different from being black when Thurgood Marshall was nominated? And again, you're still making a point. Maybe if someone else took it upon themselves to restore the info, that would be a valid objective entry then. (And no, this is not an invitation to sockpuppetry) --Golbez 20:12, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Boybandlove.GIF

Thanks for uploading Image:Boybandlove.GIF. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 12:18, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:OTOWN.gif

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:OTOWN.gif. 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 Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, 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.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShadowHalo 07:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:Mustbepop.JPG

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Mustbepop.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use disputed for Image:RogueSection31.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:RogueSection31.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:OTOWN.gif

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:OTOWN.gif. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. β^_command 23:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]