FredClem

Fair use rationale for Image:Vik Puppy Love.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Vik Puppy Love.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 non-free media 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:56, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I thought I had represented a fair rationale of "Fair Use" as a part of the image when uploaded. It met with more than one citeria (as I saw it) in the "Faiir Use" rationale. The image as a whole itself was original (I created it). It's only outside contribution was a mirrored logo of the label name, used mainly as a graphic example for the text provided. That logo itself was purposely presented in a much lower resolution than originally published. It was not intended to compromise any copyright given RCA.

Please explain further why it was withdrawn. What is considered as being a "suitable explanation"? I really thought no more explanation was necessary. (Who is "I" who withdrew the image?)

Fred Clemens (FredClem)

Fair use rationale for Image:Vik0197Samuels.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Vik0197Samuels.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 non-free media 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. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

As with previous image, I felt the image used met with "fair use" rationale as described in Wikipedia guidelines. It was intentionally of lower resolution than the original publication, and was presented as a graphic example of how the RCA owned logo (Vik) was presented in it's original form. Any other presentaion I feel would have compromised what was intended. How can you justify allowing an album cover image if you can't use the same justification in using a label image?

Wikipedia often requires "citation needed" in order to validate certain information. Many times I see information sources being as inaccurate, or that inaccurate information as being exaggerated at best. What better source is there than to go with the actual unmodified artifact? I have made corrections to certain pages based on specific artifacts (physical evidence), or what was learned from the person, himself (as was by Jerry Samuels), not what was represented by others in a book or article, ).

Fred Clemens (FredClem)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Vik Puppy Love.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Vik Puppy Love.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Vik0197Samuels.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Vik0197Samuels.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

We Belong Together (Robert & Johnny song)

Thank you for your recent contribution to the article We Belong Together. I have added a citation needed tag on the information that you have added to the article. If you could, please take some time to add into the article where you received this information from so that it can be properly sources. Thanks.Housewatcher (talk) 04:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Napoleon XIV, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Adam Wade. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Your changes on Johnny Brown (actor)

Do you have a source for your claims about his singing career? Power~enwiki (talk) 00:21, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I have the actual records, which are easily dated via their respective label's catalog system. I also have the promotional insert shown in the listing. The insert tells about the earlier part of his career.

What more would you need to know...?

Fred

I found http://www.45cat.com/artist/johnny-brown which looks like the same person, the catalogue number matches your picture. I think I can get any missing data from there. Power~enwiki (talk) 00:35, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I had added the insert there about a year ago. I had also put in for a disambiguation as there was more than one Johnny Brown listed. Their voices tell all.

Fred

Joyce Bulifant edit

I am reverting your addition of a date of birth on Joyce Bulifant. Your edit summary says, "birth date was sourced via record from ancestry(dot)com", but that is not a sufficient justification for several reasons:

• Sources need to be cited in the article -- not mentioned in an edit summary.
• WP:BLPPRIVACY specifies, "Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject . . ."
• Ancestry.com is classified as generally unreliable. (See WP:ANCESTRY.COM for details.) If the record that you mentioned is a public record, WP:BLPPRIMARY specifies, "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person. Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, ..." If not, it probably was posted by another user, which makes it unreliable. (See WP:USERGENERATED.)

I appreciate your effort to add to the article, but a reliable, published source will be needed. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:53, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

May 2022

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Denise Crosby, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 14:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

My source is a AP Wirephoto copy of her birth certificate (Certificate of Live Birth #47347), stamp-dated on the back May 9, 1958, for a newspaper story on May 6th of that year. It was used as evidence in a then current dispute going on with her Father, Dennis Crosby. This was well before any Internet distribution, so any reliable on-line source is impossible other than saying the same thing, including info as on IMDb.

If this source is considered as unreliable, then tell me a reliable way to source the info. FredClem (talk) 14:36, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Denise Crosby, you may be blocked from editing. You need to add source of birth date properly. FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 14:20, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

So what would be considered as a reliable source if not an actual full copy of her birth certificate? FredClem (talk) 15:35, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Saying where you got your source is not valid enough. It needs to be done properly. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 03:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

"properly"... How then? Many items on the page are not sourced from anything I can see.

Again, what do you consider as a "reliable source" if not the document itself, in this case a copy of a birth certificate...? FredClem (talk) 09:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Timi Yuro (and others)

I agree that Yuro's middle name was probably "Victoria." I was able to see the marriage certificate from 1957 (her first marriage at age 16, where her parents supplied the details). What is problematic is that you're making changes without providing a source link in the text. Mentioning the reason in the edit summary is not enough and suggests you're doing original research (see WP:OR). Many of your edits might be challenged. I won't revert "Victoria" because articles and obituaries I've read never mention Yuro's middle name; others repeat the myth that the name was "Timotea," which Yuro always said was an invention. 173.77.71.234 (talk) 19:30, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Regarding her middle name, I also found a copy of her 1957 marriage certificate on-line, where she signed her full name with Victoria as her middle name. I tried uploading a saved image of it, but for whatever reason it wasn't working. I had seen so many interpretations of her middle name as being Timotea and even Timothy. One story I'd read somewhere about her mentioned that her Timothy related middle name was a nickname that an Uncle gave her. I do have other info about her younger days that can be validated via Ancestry(dot)com, and those by way of copies of actual documents. There are also other tidbits of background on her via yearbooks for her 8th grade school thru her graduating under her married name as a Senior in a different school after she married. I have those earlier yearbooks as proof, but I do not have her Senior yearbook. There is no way I can validate it anymore than I can validate her middle name right now. Not EVERYTHING is on the Internet FredClem (talk) 20:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

February 2023

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Herb Alpert, you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet (talk) 01:38, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

I put back the information that I'd left before, this time crediting my Sources. As noted, not all Sources have an Internet link to supply. There are ways to find them on the Internet, but nothing that can be linked to directly. I have all of the yearbooks mentioned, and if someone else chooses to pursue them, they'll find that same information. My information is not reliant on what Someone Else wrote in a book or article, which may or may not be accurate. FredClem (talk) 06:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)