Talk:Raúl daSilva

Temporary subpage created
As per the "Possible copyright infringement" instructions, a new article has been created as a subpage of this page: Talk:Raúl daSilva/Temp

An administrator is now supposed to review matters. Peak (talk) 16:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The copyvio version has been deleted and the rewrite moved into place. --Allen3 talk 17:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Explanation of what happened
I am very sorry about the potential copyright infringement -- I am helping Raul daSilva himself to write this page, and he pointed to the IMDB page as a resource. I did cite IMDB, but understand that the article is perhaps too close to the original.

Since then, Raul has written his own bio, which I have posted on his behalf at the Ra%C3%BAl_daSilva/Temp temp page. To whomever will administrate this page, please do not delete it, but rather copy the Temp page to the main page. You will find that the Temp page does not have any copyrighted material on it, since Raul wrote it himself. --Ravinon (talk) 02:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Notes by the Subject
from Raul daSilva: There are no bios on my life on line at this juncture that have not been written by me on which someone else has a copyright. The bio is in support of my article on Photoanimation, a critical segment of history in the American cinema. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdsetc (talk • contribs) 14:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Please also note: I am the author of six books on film, one, The World of Animation, a first place national book festival prizewinner and long time on the Walt Disney recommended book list. At 75 I'm probably one of the last remaining experts on the use of the Oxberry Master Series animation camera stand. Smaller Oxberry stands are still in use but the era of film is now ending. History remains important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdsetc (talk • contribs) 14:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality check request
This article appears to me to have been generated either by the subject or by close associates working on his behalf. Two of the three references given are online articles written by the subject himself, and neither they nor the third reference is from a highly reputable and independent source. The purpose of the entire article seems to be promotion rather than impartial reporting of facts. I am going to tag the article for a neutrality check.--Jim10701 (talk) 22:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC)