Talk:Ego Trip (magazine)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ego Trip Vol. 4 No. 1.png

Image:Ego Trip Vol. 4 No. 1.png 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Article name case

I have moved the article from ego trip (magazine) to Ego Trip (magazine) to represent standard English per WP:NAME#Use standard English for titles even if trademarks encourage otherwise. The rationale for this is further explained at WP:MOSTM and WP:MOSCAPS#Mixed or non-capitalization as to why standard English capitalization is preferred for an encyclopedia. I think the article should also use standard English for the title in the article text, Ego Trip over ego trip, for the reasons outlined in those guidelines. dissolve^talk 17:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Guidelines are good, but can be excepted to. The rationale and specifics of the trademark section you quote are basically written by two people and we need not give it any particular weight when a specific case is in dispute. We are dealing here with a print publication which refers to itself in print in lower case. Throughout the text of the magazine's various editions, lowercase. In addition, ego trip has published books, the titles of which are prefixed with lower-case ego trip, ego trip's Book of Rap Lists, ego trip's Big Book of Racism!. Again, in print throughout in book form, ego trip is the form used. When ego trip makes television programs, the official name of the show is prefaced by lower case: see ego trip's The (White) Rapper Show, ego trip's Miss Rap Supreme etc. There's no need to be robotic about this. Call it what it is, nothing to do with trademarks really, surely i don't need to link to various sections in support of this. 86.44.22.206 (talk) 19:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

If it's your view that policy is against this, you could solve that by changing that specific part of the policy. It doesn't seem to be much good. Actually it just details "Convention" so it's not that bad. 86.44.22.206 (talk) 19:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

A "print publication which refers to itself", "the text of the magazine", the title of published books and television programs, are all exactly that: a Trademark. I'm in no way convinced that Wikipedia is not a soapbox (for propaganda and advertising) should not be applied to this trademark like any other. If the Ego Trip articles are indeed notable, then standard English can be used to identify them. The core policies that the Trademark guideline is based on are Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Neutral Point of View. dissolve^talk 19:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:SOAP??? If notable??? You've lost me. Please let go of the trademark thing, its basis in policy is very weak, and really has nothing to do with calling the enterprise by its name. Pry your hands off the MOS and use your own judgment. Really more consensus is demonstrated in the links I have given than in those you have, when you get right down to it. 86.44.22.206 (talk) 20:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) cites WP:SOAP for it's rationale. This article cites no reliable sources, so i have no indication that it meets WP:N. I have listed the article on Wikipedia:Requests for comment to help build a consensus on the title case of the article. dissolve^talk 21:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

*twiddles thumbs* Really you should have had it moved back before RfC. 86.44.21.173 (talk) 14:19, 9 September 2008 (UTC)