User talk:GwendalGauthier

Welcome!
Hello, GwendalGauthier, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Le Courrier de Floride, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! MelanieN (talk) 05:13, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Proposed deletion of Le Courrier de Floride


The article Le Courrier de Floride has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Does not appear to meet Wikipedia's guidelines for a publication, since there is no independent coverage about it. Probable Conflict of Interest, since the article was created by an editor with the same name as the publisher of the paper.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MelanieN (talk) 05:13, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Le Courrier de Floride for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Le Courrier de Floride is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Le Courrier de Floride until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MelanieN (talk) 16:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC)


 * HI GwendalGauthier. I commented with a "Keep" vote so far at the Articles For Deletion (AFD) process.  You are welcome to comment and "vote" there, also.  Editor MelanieN is an experienced editor in Wikipedia and has a reasonable view that the topic is not Wikipedia-notable, though I disagree.  You can best affect the Wikipedia decision to Keep vs. to Delete the article by finding sources about the Courrier which tend to establish its significance.  I myself am having trouble finding other publications mentioning the Courrier, because Google search brings up all of the Courrier's articles.  You might have such coverage though.  Coverage does not have to be on-line coverage, it just needs to be reliable sources.  At the Talk page of the article you say the publication is the only French language publication in some area that meets Google News' standards for incorporating its articles into Google News.  If you could document that, saying that in the article with source would help.  You can either add sources and info to the article, or post about them in the AFD discussion.  In the AFD discussion, which should run for a week or so, you can only "vote" once but you may comment multiple times with more info.  Hope this helps. -- do  ncr  am  21:42, 9 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Doncram, thank you a lot for your comment and your vote. To start and publish a real (and independent) newspaper in the XXIst century, a team needs a lot of time and efforts. I unfortunately can't spend my time in Wikipedia's censorship guerrillas. I copied to Melanie the first amendment of the american constitution about the freedom of speech (which includes the right to speak about yourself) and she answered me that it was only for the US government, what she's not par of. So I don't think we're speaking the same language Melanie and I. If you have a lot of censors like that in Wiki, then good luck with them. Us, journalists, are verifying BEFORE accusing, and even more before accusing a journalist or a newspaper. This is the price of freedom of speech, and i don't think that with what is happening to journalists, killed around the world, the reflex of "censorship first" like i've seen here on Wiki is really glorious. Asking more informations, yes, of course, censorship and lessons about "i'm not the US government i do what i want"... I'm not interested to discuss a too long time about.
 * In France we have another journalistic rule : we're not speaking about ourselves, never. So, no, at Le Courrier we've not searched to make our communication or to ask some people to speak about us, so we have some website who are linking to our articles, but no articles about us really. Nonetheless, this morning i've been interviewed by a french newspaper about Le Courrier, and they told me they'll publish an article on wednesday. If it's still time, i may link it as a source...
 * Thank you again Doncram.

GwendalGauthier (talk) 00:16, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * (I indented GG's comments just above.) Thanks for responding.  Sorry, yes, it is difficult for new editors to get started in Wikipedia because there are many rules and policies and guidelines, with contradictions between them, and there is often enforcement that can seem unfair.  From previous, positive interactions with MelanieN, I know her to be a good and fair editor, though she and I have tended to disagree about where we draw the line about notability of topics for articles.  I think she's correct in what she's informed you about, as far as I have read (I just read some of your discussion at User talk:MelanieN), including that technically in Wikipedia's internal definition you have a conflict of interest (per wp:COI) about the Courrier article.  The COI policy allows you to create and to edit the article;  the main points are that you are just supposed to disclose your connection and cooperate with non-COI editors.
 * I understand also that you can't spend too much time on this; that is quite reasonable. I will use some information from your discussion with MelanieN to post a further comment at the AFD, shortly.  It may be the case that covering the Courrier is appropriate at the list-article mentioned there, for a while, until there is more independent coverage about the Courrier itself;  see the AFD.  Even if the current article is deleted for now, I would expect that a new article would eventually be created.  There's no rush, from point of view of building the encyclopedia, for this topic to be covered.
 * About free speech, MelanieN is correct that Wikipedia is not a forum where free speech principles apply about everything. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia's mainspace is limited to articles about generally well-established topics, using reliable sources that are preferably secondary or tertiary sources;  we must avoid the appearance of advocating new, unproven, not-accepted theories and fringe theories and so on.  About newspapers or historic buildings or schools or musicians other topics, we have to avoid allowing new articles on just anyone's new garage band or new daycare center or whatever;  there have evolved rules and practices including the AFD process for deciding which are acceptable or not.  There is sympathy for free speech in general among editors and a tendency to want to cover important issues in the world, but you must understand that wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, is not a forum for just anyone to say anything.
 * I hope this helps. -- do ncr  am  17:50, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes Doncram it's of course well understood, I just don't have the same point fo view than Melanie about freedom of speech, and it's funny to me that some persons can tell "i'm not concerned". It's not about wiki rules, it's just about her first reaction : censorship and suspicion, justified by an "i'm not concerned about the first US amendment". (I'm not more american than her, but i will not publish here the lists of the human rights and all the constitutions of the world about freedom of speech). --GwendalGauthier (talk) 19:22, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, okay, no problem. MelanieN is actually a really nice individual to be the one you're bumping into, about Wikipedia policies and rules and so on, relative to many possible others, in your first experience in Wikipedia.  The editing environment here is generally terrible for newcomers and often also for very experienced editors, in my opinion, unfortunately. :(  You'll see that MelanieN suggested two sources at the AFD, about prevalence of French language in Florida, and I have now used those in the article.  It would be great if there is more that can be said, attributable to sources, specifically about Le Courrier.  You don't have any circulation figures reported anywhere, do you?  For printed newspapers especially, i would think that has to be measured for advertisers, but maybe you don't have that yet?  Anyhow, hang in there.  I am now occasionally checking the website of Le Courrier to browse and read articles, by the way. -- do  ncr  am  00:15, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Doncram. No unfortunately it doesn't exist for free newspapers, we don't have controls like the paying newspapers have. Like i told you, on wednesday will be published another article about Le Courrier in a french newspaper... One more... --GwendalGauthier (talk) 00:22, 13 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi again. Thanks for adding more to the article. You'll see that User:MelanieN appreciated the development of the article and withdrew/closed the AFD as "Keep".


 * I have another comment or two more about developing the article, which I will post at Talk:Le Courrier de Floride, which is where further discussion about developing the article should take place. Please do watch and comment there.  See what I ask about "the first interview" of Gérard Araud, for example, in a few minutes.
 * Anyhow, congratulations I guess! -- do ncr  am  19:14, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

logo
About the logo you uploaded, thanks, that is good, it adds to the article on Le Courrier de Floride. I would have suggested that you provide a logo; you beat me to it. But actually to protect the company's own rights properly, I think you should get assistance to withdraw that uploading, and do it again with copyright protected rather than "CC-by-SA" or whatever free use being granted. It is okay/good for Wikipedia editors (even persons disconnected from a company) to upload a copyrighted company logo and to use it in an article about the company, under "fair use" allowance of copyright laws. I recently sort of advised another corporation about doing that, although I am not an expert about uploading files or about copyrights. What I suggested to them, and I suggest to you, is that you email to wp:OTRS to ask for assistance. That is a confidential email service performed by volunteers having special rights, which can deal with permissions to use copyrighted materials. I think -- but I am not positive -- that you can retract the uploading you performed, and then replace it, but you should seek assistance with that right away if you want it to be done. Hope this helps. -- do ncr  am  19:14, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The logo is trademarked in Florida... --GwendalGauthier (talk) 19:25, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi again, and I see that at Talk:Le Courrier de Floride that you provided a link or two about the trademarking. I am not a lawyer, and I am not clear about differences between trademark and copyright.  And this is your business not mine, but I think it's possible that your protection of the logo is reduced by your posting the logo file under CC-by-SA legal license.  The other corporation that I was recently advising, sort of, had trademarked and/or copyrighted its name, but in the past it had to fight legal battles through several U.S. court cases to protect their rights (it almost went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court), and they're still fighting about inappropriate usage of their name by others.  Why leave any ambiguity about your protection if you don't have to?  Since you could post the logo with full copyright restricted, without giving away any rights at all to others, and that could be used in the article, I just think you might prefer that.  It's entirely your business, not mine;  I won't bring it up again.   I mention this here rather than at the Talk page of the article because this is not at all about improving the article, which does have a version of the logo now.  Cheers, -- do  ncr  am  20:08, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I'll check that point Dombass. Thank you to have voted to accept the page ! We'll try to make it better in the future !--GwendalGauthier (talk) 20:15, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Haiti
Bonjour GwendalGauthier, I noticed your possible interests in Haiti-related topics and thought I'd extend the invite to a completely revamped WikiProject Haiti. Cheers! Savvyjack23 (talk) 01:54, 22 June 2017 (UTC)