User talk:Knight01VUSGAS

Speedy deletion of Virtual United States Government Aviation Services
A tag has been placed on Virtual United States Government Aviation Services requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. KurtRaschke (talk) 21:37, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Virtual airline
Hi there! Thanks heaps for participating in the Virtual airline article. There is however a little bit of a problem in that the text (which I have included below, in case you want to fix it and re-add) is original research. You need to ensure that text you add is notable, and verifiable in an independent source. An example, would be, if the dispute you mentioned was covered in the New York Times, or a local newspaper. You could even link to court documents, although you would still have to prove why such a case was notable. Does this make sense? Feel free to let me know, and I'd be glad to help. Cheers! Icemotoboy (talk) 03:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Some virtual airlines have also been known to sell out to other virtual airlines during financial disputes. An example would be in 2008 when two virtual militaries, the Virtual United States Government Aviation Services (VUSGAS) had purchased the Virtual United States Air Forces (VUSAFS) after VUSAFS had financial problems. The owner of VUSAFS had refused to pay the monthly costs for the organization, resulting in a forced auction to take place. In October of 2008, VUSGAS had purchased VUSAFS for a price of merely $60. While some of the former VUSAFS members took aim at VUSGAS as trying to monopolize the virtual military market and violating copyright laws buy using the VUSAFS name on their website. VUSGAS claimed it rightfully bought all VUSAFS licensing during the purchase. The dispute never went to court and was never officially resolved, although no recent conflicts from the case have taken place since, at least not with public knowledge. Some virtual airlines have had disputes between each other over arguments similar to the VUSGAS-VUSAFS case, but no public record shows that any of the cases had court involvement. Many organizations have been known to have issues regarding name violations, such as Virtual Continental Airlines and Continental Virtual Airlines, both claiming they had ownership to the Continental title. Public opinion shows that both organizations are fully legal in their name choosings because the exact title had not been used twice. Virtual airlines have also been known to have issues with flight simulator aircraft designers and providers. While some designers state that their products may not be added to outside websites other than their own, virtual airlines have been often known to provide links (which some consider legal since they do not have the actual product uploaded to the website) for the downloads. Some feel that illegal downloading can only be confirmed if the supplier uploads the actual file to their server as oppposed to providing a connecting link to another website. Most cases involving copyright violation never go to trial.