User talk:Julianstorer

Juce
Hello, it was not baseless. Please read about conflict of interest and Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Wikipedia is not a place to promote your product or list endless specifications. Renata 11:36, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Refer to Deletion Review if you think you are right. Renata 16:15, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You're supposed to have the deletion reviewed at the above location rather than just going ahead and recreating it. That can be grounds for the content to be speedy-deleted again (via the Criterion for Speedy Deletion G4), although it generally doesn't apply when the content was speedy-deleted in the first place, as was the case here.  You should look into it in more detail yourself; if you're right, then the good folks at Deletion Review will agree with you and you'll be fine. -- tiny plastic Grey Knight   ⊖  16:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I noticed that you'd made the article as factual as possible, that's always a good idea. But since you and User:Renata3 disagree on other issues (like notability and conflict of interest), it's worthwhile getting an outside opinion.  It is possible to write neutrally about something in which you have a vested interest, but of course it's difficult.  I'm happy to work with you on this so we can get a good article on the subject!
 * I'm pursuing the matter at Deletion Review (WP:DRV) myself (there's no requirement that it need be you who does it :-3); debate maybe isn't your cup of tea, but you can stick in two penn'orth if you want! If you know of any other notable reviews other than the Register one, for instance, that'd be worth mentioning (I found some blog reviews, but those generally aren't useful unless the blog is particularly well-known).
 * Dealing with the copyright question is really simple to deal with, all you need to do is demonstrate that you are Julian Storer and then of course we know that you can license out your own words in any way you wish. :-) Just upload something at, say, http://www.rawmaterialsoftware.com/juce/yes-its-me.txt with a quick note that you're User:Julianstorer on Wikipedia, and that should be satisfactory, I'd think (and would only take a few seconds).
 * -- tiny plastic Grey Knight  ⊖  09:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Jucelogo.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Jucelogo.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, 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 fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 17:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Jucelogo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jucelogo.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 17:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)