Talk:Selsley: Difference between revisions
→Copyright?: Identification of CharlieKingham with Graham Thomas. |
Original research rather than copyright problems |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Clarification is quite simple. CharlieKingham, who launched this article, is Graham Thomas, so I assume there is not a copyright problem. Alas, this is far from the most egregious example of Graham Thomas using Wikipedia to publicise himself or his work. On 26 December 2006, CharlieKingham put Graham Thomas's birthday into the 1954 article, describing himself as a "leading advertising guru". That survived for a mere three hours. CharlieKingham's talk page shows that he also launched an article plugging a vanity-published book by Graham Thomas. This was eventually found out and deleted. It appears from 211.155.168.68 that CharlieKingham also launched an article about (guess who?) Graham Thomas, which was also found out and deleted. Good work, fellow Wikipedians. [[User:Karlsoy|Karlsoy]] ([[User talk:Karlsoy|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC) |
Clarification is quite simple. CharlieKingham, who launched this article, is Graham Thomas, so I assume there is not a copyright problem. Alas, this is far from the most egregious example of Graham Thomas using Wikipedia to publicise himself or his work. On 26 December 2006, CharlieKingham put Graham Thomas's birthday into the 1954 article, describing himself as a "leading advertising guru". That survived for a mere three hours. CharlieKingham's talk page shows that he also launched an article plugging a vanity-published book by Graham Thomas. This was eventually found out and deleted. It appears from 211.155.168.68 that CharlieKingham also launched an article about (guess who?) Graham Thomas, which was also found out and deleted. Good work, fellow Wikipedians. [[User:Karlsoy|Karlsoy]] ([[User talk:Karlsoy|talk]]) 22:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC) |
||
== Original research? == |
|||
The point raised by [[User:Karlsoy|Karlsoy]] above deals with the copyright issue, but turns the article into one of original research, so I have posted a template accordingly. See [[User talk:Charliekingham]] for more evidence on this point. [[User:PDAWSON3|PDAWSON3]] ([[User talk:PDAWSON3|talk]]) 22:38, 20 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 22:38, 20 June 2009
 | UK geography Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
It's true this page is not written from a neutral point of view and sounds like a magazine article, but I think it is so poetically written that whoever wrote it should be notified before it is edited so they can post it somewhere else (e.g. on the Selsley village website). yewtree 20:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Copyright?
Chunks of this article seem to have been lifted from this article which is copyrighted by the author Graham Thomas. Can anybody clarify the matter? If not I will remove offending chunks. Lame Name (talk) 19:57, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Clarification is quite simple. CharlieKingham, who launched this article, is Graham Thomas, so I assume there is not a copyright problem. Alas, this is far from the most egregious example of Graham Thomas using Wikipedia to publicise himself or his work. On 26 December 2006, CharlieKingham put Graham Thomas's birthday into the 1954 article, describing himself as a "leading advertising guru". That survived for a mere three hours. CharlieKingham's talk page shows that he also launched an article plugging a vanity-published book by Graham Thomas. This was eventually found out and deleted. It appears from 211.155.168.68 that CharlieKingham also launched an article about (guess who?) Graham Thomas, which was also found out and deleted. Good work, fellow Wikipedians. Karlsoy (talk) 22:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Original research?
The point raised by Karlsoy above deals with the copyright issue, but turns the article into one of original research, so I have posted a template accordingly. See User talk:Charliekingham for more evidence on this point. PDAWSON3 (talk) 22:38, 20 June 2009 (UTC)