Talk:William Schaff

revisions to meet notability standards
To help article meet notability standards, peacock terms were removed and links to published 3rd party articles about William Schaff were added. Psipe 17:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * 23-Jan-2008: I agree that any glowing, peacock terms are gone now. I have also added source citations from The Boston Globe and the Austin Chronicle, so I untagged the article, removing templates for "{ {notability|...}}" and peacock. -Wikid77 (talk) 10:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:SongsMagnoliaSC76big.jpg
Image:SongsMagnoliaSC76big.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under "Wikipedia: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 "Wikipedia:Image copyright tags", 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 WP:FU.

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 "Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia". If you have any questions please ask them at the Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 15:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * 23-Jan-2008: I have updated the fair-use templates in that image description page, and then amended the article text to meet fair-use by adding album commentary. So, above, I have unlinked the 10 overlinked Wikipedia policy ("WP:FU" etc.) articles in the BetacommandBot blurp, because wikibarfing 10 overlinks for every image problem is choking Wikipedia with millions of overlinks in every article talk-page (like people can't type "WP:FU" to look it up: no, have every Bot wiki-spamlink 10 links per Bot memo). What do bots generate, perhaps, 200,000 overlinks per day? And those wikilinks remain for years until people delete the Bot memos from talk-pages. -Wikid77 (talk) 10:22, 23 January 2008 (UTC)