User talk:SteveMiller4LV

Ref James Barrier article: To StevMiller4LV PLEASE adhere to Wikipedia guidelines. Please see Wikipedia:Vandalism for definition. Please DO NOT repost, repost, repost. This is not the way it is done on Wikipedia.

Posting guidelines/instructions

To User:SteveMiller4LV, please refer to Wiki NPOV for posting guidelines. Also, go to objectivity for further clarification/explanation. Thank you. AuthorAuthor (talk) 06:33, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Am attempting to keep this article neutral, but user SteveMiller4LV (and now under an anonymous posting) you continue reposting statements that do not relate to the James Barrier death case. Please comply to Wikipedia's stringent Neutral Point of View (NPOV). Please do not simply restate your unsubstantiated premise. This is a neutral zone and not a site for commentary. AuthorAuthor (talk) 06:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research

What you are adding to the James Barrier article is original research. This means you have interpreted facts about his death and related it to facts about toxicology (as you understand them) and, apparently, drawn your own conclusions. Whether you are an expert in this field or not does not matter. Original research is not permitted on Wikipedia. If you can find a reliable and notable source that verifies your conclusions then please cite it. Otherwise please stop adding it. Thanks. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 22:47, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From Steve Miller: I have attempted to provide a link to SpectroscopyNow.com that explains, "GHB, or g-hydroxybutyric acid, is a metabolite of the neurotransmitter GABA (g-aminobutyric acid) and occurs at levels below 10 ug/mL in normal subjects."[1]

The information I have tried to provide is not my personal opinion. I am attempting to clarify through a reliable source in the field of toxicology that there may be multiple theories as to how James Barrier died. AuthorAuthor is repeating and repeating a coroner's opinion that Mr. Barrier had a "normal" amount of GHB in his system, therefore he died of other causes. I advised Wikopedia readers that the coroner she refers to is not a medical expert and does not have medical credentials, that his opinion that 20mg/mL of GHB is a normal quantity of the date rape drug GHB that most people have in their blood is not a medically qualified opinion, nor should AuthorAuthor be using it as reliable information on Wikopedia. Your readers deserve better information, however, I will comply with your ruling and cease contributing qualified research on this subject.

Your opinion of the coroner's medical credentials or decisions is not relevant. Have any reputable sources questioned his credentials or decision, because that's all that is relevant on Wikipedia. And as I have tried to explain, what the SpectroscopyNow link says is also irrelevant as it does not directly mention James Barrier. It is you that is relating what it says to his death, and that is original synthesis, which Wikipedia does not allow. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 20:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did to James Barrier, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 09:33, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to James Barrier, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 18:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on James Barrier. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. —Travis ^talk 23:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You really need to establish consensus by discussing your change on the article’s talk page before adding the material again. I do not want to block you, but you have already violated the three-revert rule and are treading on very thin ice. Please heed my advice and discuss your changes with other editors. Thank you. —Travis ^talk 00:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained what you need to do if you wish the info to be added on the article talk page. Please read it. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:BobStupakUnveilsModelOfStupakTower.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:BobStupakUnveilsModelOfStupakTower.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:10, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Bob Stupak unvails Stupak Tower model at press conference.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Bob Stupak unvails Stupak Tower model at press conference.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Bob Stupak unveils model of "Stupak Tower" at press conference.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Bob Stupak unveils model of "Stupak Tower" at press conference.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 19:22, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]