Talk:Carlin at Carnegie

Latest comment: 14 years ago by TopherBrink in topic 200 dirty words

Fair use rationale for Image:GC Carnegie.jpg edit

 

Image:GC Carnegie.jpg is being used on this article. 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 this Wikipedia article 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. 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.

BetacommandBot 23:13, 6 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

200 indecent words, where? edit

wiki/Seven_dirty_words, in the paragraph that links to here, says there are over 200 words. But here I don't see the list of those 200+ words. Would somebody please provide it? (Yes, I'm *really* curious!) 198.144.192.45 (talk) 08:08, 18 April 2010 (UTC) Twitter.Com/CalRobert (Robert Maas)Reply

200 dirty words edit

Looking at the history the list of 200 dirty words has been added and removed several times, many of these revisions are undone citing copyright reasons. Could someone please comment once and for all on whether or not the list should be on the page?

- ♚TopherBrink⚜ ✯(Talk)☯ 22:22, 24 April 2010 (UTC)Reply