Cottonchipper

August 2009

Response to your edits on Lea County Regional Airport

Hi Cottonchipper, when removing content (especially sourced content) from article's you should always add an appropriate edit summary to explain the reason for the removal of content, if you believe a section of an article is wrong you're always free to correct it, being a fairly new editor however I'd encourage you to read the welcome page before making any further edits to Wikipedia, let me know if you have any further questions. Thanks. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 01:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Hobbs Army Air Field

Hi again, if you let me know which airport this is supposed to redirect to and Wiki has an article on it I will correct the redirection for you. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 02:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok that's fine, I'm going to adjust the page slightly to make into more of a Wiki article though. Thanks for your contributions and I hope to see you around in the future. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 02:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Good job on Hobbs Army Air Field, I've been keeping an eye on the article and am glad to see that you've decided to help out, the article's on my watchlist now and I intend to expand it in the not so distant future. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 03:02, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I'll have a look at that PDF later on tonight, see if it has any information I might be able to add to Hobbs Army Air Field, and never know, might just learn something. :P Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 13:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

A-1 Club discussion

Hi Cottonchipper, thank you for your comment in my talk page. I just left you a reply. Zul32 (talk) 13:04, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Question about listing of closed Nevada casinos

Personally I think that most of these casinos played a significant role in the development of Nevada and were tied into the war effort in some interesting ways. However my opinions don't matter. As long as we can meet notability using reliable sources any article which can meet those should be able to stay. As to the articles on casinos you would like to create, if you can source them, then you should be OK. Online sources have been shown to be rather thin. That means that we need to got to books or newspapers to source the articles. That makes research more difficult and time consuming. Normally I like to see two independent sources when I start an article. Given the issues with these old casinos, I think we need to have 3 or more. If the text is correctly cited ({{cite news}} as an example), then the article should remain. If the article is really thin and needs long term help to further develop it, this is a solution. Simply include it as a section of the location article. Then create a redirect. If you have a casino in mind that would benefit from this approach, let me know and I'll show you how to set this up. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:41, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Images for HAAF

Hi Cottonchipper, I noticed you added a piture to HAAF, I was wondering if you had any aerial images of the sight that are in the public domain, an aerial photo would be ideal. Thanks. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 00:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

• In the booklet "Keep Em Flying" that I have linked on the HAAF page there is a good aerial photo from about 1943 showing the many structures and planes in place. It was obtained from the USAF Historical Research Center. The City of Hobbs owns the rights to the publication, but have given me permission to publish it online. Do you think that is permission enough, being that the photo itself came from the USAF? I don't know what the USAF's permission requirements are, if any, but I have the printed copy of the book and can make a good scan this weekend if you like. Cottonchipper (talk) 13:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
  • To be honest with you, I am currently unfamiliar with Wikipedia's policies on image uploads, I've added a thread here Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, asking whether or not the image can be uploaded under our current information/permissions. I've also looked through Wiki's Image use policy and to my understanding, presuming that the image is work by the US Army, the shot should be in the public domain. I'll keep you updated, hopefully we can use the image. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 21:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
    • This says "permission to use" is not enough, I'll request permission to use the image within the next few days. Thanks for your help. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 22:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
      • What about the licensing used on this photograph? [1] The photo the authors of Keep Em Flying was from the USAF Historical Research Center, so it was taken by an Air Force employee in the course of their job. Looks like that type of licensing should work, but I don't know much about it. Cottonchipper (talk) 23:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
        • If it's the work of an Air Force employee it should be ok, if you can dig out the shot, this should be the appropriate upload form. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 01:19, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
          • In response to the Air Field vs Airfield, I'm not sure, on this list of US Army airfields most if not all airfields have "airfield" as one word at the end, maybe it's an American-English thing.
            • Here it is: HAAF_1943.jpgCottonchipper (talk) 02:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
• Ahh excellent, thank you! I added it to the article. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 04:18, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:TommyWomackbyScottWillis.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:TommyWomackbyScottWillis.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:21, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I give up. Whatever. Seems like you've got to be a damn lawyer to do anything on this site or understand your ridiculously arcane rules. I was just trying to help a regular guy singer-songwriter by posting a picture he provided taken by someone he knows. Do whatever you think is right and give yourself a big pat on the back.

Cottonchipper (talk) 01:32, 16 June 2017 (UTC)