User talk:Aaronmichaelalper

Welcome!
Hello, Aaronmichaelalper, and welcome to Wikipedia!&#32;Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was St. Petersburg Pier, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article.&#32;Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms our use and policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! – TheGridExe  ( talk )  13:49, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Ok. This was not supposed to be a "conflict of interest". If you knew how much of the community went into making that book, you would not have been so hasty. The artist who did the cover died of cancer; that was my main drive of putting it up there. Someone else had took it upon themselves to mention our project (that might clue you in on how big the event was for the Pier) and thought I would pay tribute to both an artist and a building that are no longer standing. Now the question: what conflict was actually caused here and the Draconian micromanagement over an image that actually has a role in the history of the pier? Why all this pomp and circumstance while other pages read like poorly written essays from teenagers and slow adults? Aaronmichaelalper (talk) 14:51, 1 June 2018 (UTC)aaronmichaelalper


 * I'm not quite sure what "Draconian micromanagement" you refer to. This explanation shows that there should be some further effort; namely, since despite the tag on the file page the cover is not your own work but that of the now-deceased artist, we may need written confirmation that you indeed own the copyright to the cover and are in a position to release it under a free license. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted content; the easiest way to provide that confirmation probably is an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org.
 * That said, it should be obvious what the conflict of interest is: You as a co-editor of that book (obviously) have a high opinion of its significance. Would someone not associated with the project share that high opinion? Maybe, maybe not. It would be better to leave it to editors not personally involved with the book to decide whether it has so much of a "role in the history of the pier" that showing its cover improves our readers' understanding of that history. Wikipedia is not a memorial; while your wish to pay tribute to the artist is understandable, the Wikipedia article may not be the best venue to do so. Huon (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

A) I own the copyright. I can provide documentation. Justin signed the rights over to the LLC, which I formed. So you need not be concerned about any legal issues; the law is on my side. But that's beside the point, right, because basically you're hell-bent on telling me that my posting that image is, more or less, against Wikipedia law. You also seem to be very keen on letting me know how absolute your authority is. The "Wikipedia is not a memorial" for "the artist" line was a nice touch-you gutted my emotional appeal (which I should not have given, fair enough) and made me look stupid. All in one paragraph too! Such power you have! I get it now, though. Letting that image (which, again, I do own) remain as part of the article would sully the Wikipedia brand and lead to bedlam.

Allow to rephrase my thinking and ask you this: would the fact the book received awards from the City of St. Pete, the University of South Florida St. Pete, and the Tampa Bay Times Festival of Reading make you reconsider that it's not just my "high opinion" that made me feel justified in posting the cover art? Would Bay area television segments on the books myriad contributors make a difference? Radio interviews? You see, the list of people who made this book seem "high opinion" are way more powerful than I am. Their involvement made the book a big deal. Not as big of a deal as being a Wikipedia gatekeeper, mind you, but enough to garner attention from the city of St. Pete, USF and the mayor's office. I won't name names, but one of these people has a building named after her in downtown St. Pete and, as luck would have it, I have her personal number! Shall I just ask her to have her assistant take care of reposting the image? I am sure it would take the same time to set that up as it would take for me to pull out my legal rights to make that happen.

I look forward to your response. I also apologize for not responding with all the proper protocol/citations, etc. I could not bring myself to give that much of a bugger's toss. Aaronmichaelalper (talk) 20:44, 1 June 2018 (UTC)aaronmichaelalper


 * Regarding copyright, I just noticed that the image has been deleted due to inappropriate licensing (I wasn't involved in the deletion). If you meant to release the cover image under a free license that allows everybody to re-use and modify the image for any purpose, including commercial purposes, you should provide confirmation via email that you indeed are the copyright holder or in a position to speak on behalf of the copyright holder. I apologize for the bureaucracy, but you'll appreciate that the purpose of that bureaucracy is to prevent a random person from creating a Wikipedia account under your name and infringing your copyright. I don't doubt the law is on your side; the point is that we need evidence. Again, WP:Donating copyrighted content has the relevant details; you can find a release form at WP:Declaration of consent for all enquiries.
 * Regarding the use of the cover in the article, I'm not "hell-bent on telling you your actions are wrong". If I were, I wouldn't give recommendations or advice on what would be better. I'd revert your changes and tell you that "Your actions violate policy XYZ; if you do that again you might be blocked from editing."
 * So now that's out of the way, the issue at hand is not whether the book is significant in its own right. Is it significant to the pier? If you're confident that other people will agree with your judgement, then you can propose such edits on the article's talk page and leave the implementation to others, as is considered best practice for editors with a conflict of interest, and you'll avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Or you can add it yourself despite what the policy recommends, but then you shouldn't be surprised if your conduct might raise eyebrows. Huon (talk) 19:03, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Is it significant to the Pier? According to the Pier's publicist, yes. Record breaking attendance and lead to the Pier getting a few extra years out of it before it was torn down. In fact, that book and it's release was the last time the Pier made the news (not counting when it was destroyed).

I will find someone else to post the image. However, how is someone infringing on my copyrights under a fake account bad, yet allowing "a free license that allows everybody to re-use and modify the image for any purpose, including commercial purposes" good? Am I missing something? It seems to me the bureaucracy is there to allow Wikipedia to hold no responsibilities while creating a threat to copyright holders who don't have a legal team that costs more both our annual salaries combined. How on earth would I appreciate that bureaucracy? That is only appreciated by Wikipedia's CEO's. I hope you're either a functional psychopath or you make a lot of money doing this job. If not, I cannot see how it wouldn't make you feel, well, a little dirty.

You will have your evidence. Just give me time to gather my paperwork. Make no mistake, I am going to be do my best to win this argument because a) the book is out of print/the artist is dead/nobody is doing anything with that image that threatens me as the copyright holder and b) I am right. However, even if the image doesn't go up, this has been a fascinating insight about the inner workings of Wikipedia. This tete a tete makes for great reading. So, from one writer to another, thank you.

And feel free to block me from editing if you want. What kind of a person places actual worth on being a Wikipedia editor? Oh. I am sorry. So much for avoiding the appearance of impropriety.

Regards,

Aaronmichaelalper (talk) 15:18, 3 June 2018 (UTC)aaronmichaelalper


 * You know, I was about to give you explanations, advice, whatever I can to try and help you. That would likely just get me insulted more, so I'll not bother. If you actually want help, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Otherwise I'll gladly leave you alone; good luck with your endeavours. Huon (talk) 15:47, 3 June 2018 (UTC)