User talk:Jackokelley

License tagging for Image:Louis Stettner Wiki Page August 2007.pdf
Thanks for uploading Image:Louis Stettner Wiki Page August 2007.pdf. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 04:08, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Louis Stettner
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Louis Stettner, and it appears to be a substantial copy of. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 12:21, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Louis Stettner copyright
I have tagged this page as a copyright violation. Please see the instructions at template:sd-copyvio for ways to release the text under GFDL if you are the owner of the website. The Evil Spartan 13:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Louis Stettner unreferenced
On this edit of yours: The article is unreferenced. It was unreferenced, and I marked it so; and it still is unreferenced, which is why I just now re-marked it so.

Of course the content derives pretty directly (and indeed problematically; see above) from what's written on Stettner's own site. Now, I happen to find Stettner a very credible source on Stettner. However, this won't wash: however much I'd like to, we shouldn't treat Stettner as more authoritative on himself than we'd treat (say) some apparently second-rate and self-promoting fashion photographer -- don't ask me to name names, but such people abound within Wikipedia! -- as an authoritative source on himself.

Much of what the article says is also backed up by the text in the only book by Stettner that I happen to possess, the superb Wisdom Cries Out in the Streets. This is better than Stettner's site for our purposes, because although the text was written by Stettner (and contains some obvious misprints) it was approved by the highly respected firm of Flammarion. But it's still not the best source.

It will be very easy for you to come up with a list of Wikipedia articles that are referenced worse than Louis Stettner is. But this is a crummy excuse. Stettner's work deserves the best treatment, and you'll find models for this among the minuscule minority of really good articles that Wikipedia has on photographers. As a Stettner enthusiast, surely you'll have access to authoritative material about him and his work that's unquestionably independent of him. There's no huge rush to "source" every claim, but a little more of this every week or so will help to improve the article.

I hope that you have also responded to the copyright query (from the alarmingly named but well-intentioned "Evil Spartan") immediately above. -- Hoary (talk) 02:28, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I see that you ignored my message above and re-removed the warning. If you think it is misplaced, argue your point. The normal place to do this is Talk:Louis Stettner; your recent blanking of that page would normally be regarded as vandalism but I am optimistically interpreting it as the fruit of inexperience rather than of malice. Please do no remove comments from any talk page other than your own talk page. Thank you. -- Hoary (talk) 06:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

time on my hands (or not)
I've just now noticed this edit. Whether I'm crazy is not for me to judge. However, I don't have much time on my hands (one reason why it's taken me so long to notice the edit). Incidentally, adding comments such as that to people's user pages is not a good way to win friends or influence people. -- Hoary (talk) 00:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)