Misplaced Pages

Talk:Larry Sanger: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:29, 26 January 2010 editQuackGuru (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users79,978 edits Citizendium Screen Shot: Why are you wasting my time?← Previous edit Revision as of 22:46, 26 January 2010 edit undoOnorem (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers55,818 edits Citizendium Screen Shot: We're obviously not getting anywhere. My apologies for wasting your time. I've brought the issue up at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content reviewNext edit →
Line 91: Line 91:


:::::::::"Simply writing a rationale doesn't automatically make it valid." No, simply implying the rationale is not valid without a specific objection is odd. A FUR was written but no specific objection to the text of the FUR was made. I don't understand why you are asking why the fair use image explains that Sanger founded Citizendium. Some editors claim the image is not relevant to this page but when Larry Sanger founded the web site it becomes clear it is relevant. I have already explained why the image meets ] in my previous comment. ] (]) 22:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC) :::::::::"Simply writing a rationale doesn't automatically make it valid." No, simply implying the rationale is not valid without a specific objection is odd. A FUR was written but no specific objection to the text of the FUR was made. I don't understand why you are asking why the fair use image explains that Sanger founded Citizendium. Some editors claim the image is not relevant to this page but when Larry Sanger founded the web site it becomes clear it is relevant. I have already explained why the image meets ] in my previous comment. ] (]) 22:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

::::::::::We're obviously not getting anywhere. My apologies for wasting your time. I've brought the issue up at ]. --]]] 22:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


::::{{ec}} The images in the Wales article are unlike this one a) free b) high-quality or at least decipherable and c) there because I put them there. One of the reasons for this is that there are a ] of free Wales image, something which ] be said in this instance. Regards, ] 20:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC) ::::{{ec}} The images in the Wales article are unlike this one a) free b) high-quality or at least decipherable and c) there because I put them there. One of the reasons for this is that there are a ] of free Wales image, something which ] be said in this instance. Regards, ] 20:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:46, 26 January 2010

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Larry Sanger article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Good articleLarry Sanger has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 19, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
March 2, 2008Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconBiography
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPhilosophy: Philosophers / Epistemology / Contemporary Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Philosophers
Taskforce icon
Epistemology
Taskforce icon
Contemporary philosophy
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
[REDACTED] Misplaced Pages High‑importance
[REDACTED] This article is within the scope of WikiProject Misplaced Pages, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Misplaced Pages.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
The following Misplaced Pages contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
Peace dove with olive branch in its beakPlease stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3
Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Citizendium Screen Shot

(was WP:ANI)

The edit war needs to stop. I've posted this issue at ANI. Feel free to discuss it there. ←Baseball Bugs carrots17:00, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Two points here:

  • The image is currently not cleared for use in this article. There's a procedure for getting clearance (I think; not an area I've looked into much before) and it hasn't been completed.
  • This picture is complete crap and of marginal relevance, anyway. An unreadable thumbnail of a screenshot of a web site doesn't illustrate anything about Larry Sanger. Sanger's article isn't a dumping ground for trivialities from the Citizendium page; if the reader is interested in a thorough treatment of that project they can click through.

Rvcx (talk) 00:51, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

All of you, stop the back and forth edits and wait for input from other editors, thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:01, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
There already was input from other editors at ANI. The result was keep. Rvcx is removing the image against consensus and for no logical reason. QuackGuru (talk) 01:18, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
WP:ANI does not address content issues. They are addressing your behavior; i.e. whether your edit-warring is grounds for a block. If you would like to comment on the two points I make here about the content dispute, then please do so. Rvcx (talk) 01:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
ANI addressed the fair use of the image like this comment. No consensus has been reached to removing the image after it has been in the article for a long time. The image is cleared for use in this article. The image is useful and appropriate for the Citizendium section. QuackGuru (talk) 01:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
No, it didn't. I'd say that it also didn't establish any sort of consensus on the content dispute that you could point to in your argument here. --OnoremDil 01:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
It'd be much easier for people to follow discussion if you'd reply instead of changing your previous comments...but that comment makes the argument for including it in the article about the website. Even if the argument was for inclusion in this article, that's no consensus for saying any result was reached. --OnoremDil 02:19, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
You added a FUR for this article. Whether it's a valid FUR or not is another issue. Why is the image needed here. Do other website founder articles include screenshots under fair use? From the few I've looked at, it doesn't seem common. Again, could you please respond without simply changing your previous comments? People looking to follow the conversation shouldn't have to use the history tab to do it. --OnoremDil 03:03, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Whether it's a valid FUR or not is not another issue when no specific objection was made to the FUR, especially when the image has no market value and is clearly relevant to the Citizendium section. The image is needed because it improves the article. The image is relevant to the CZ section becuase Sanger founded CZ. It is common for BLPs to have a handful of images in the body. This page has no images in the body. QuackGuru (talk) 17:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Adding an image for the sake of having an image is poor editing. There is absolutely no need to "illustrate" Citizendium, in fact the screenshot is nothing but a distraction from the content of the article. Any reader curious for a more detailed description of Citizendium can click through to that article; it is only appropriate to summarize the aspects of the project relevant to Larry Sanger here. A screenshot provides no further insight into Larry Sanger or his life. Rvcx (talk) 17:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Adding an image that illustrates Citizendium for a section about Citizendium is good argument to keep the image. Images are not a distraction in BLPs. Lots of BLPs have images in the body. Your argument does not make any sense. QuackGuru (talk) 17:41, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Any fair use of the screenshot on this website is being discussed at Misplaced Pages:Possibly_unfree_files/2010_January_2#File:Citizendium.png. I see no consensus either way so far. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:32, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

So far there was never any consensus to remove the image. QuackGuru (talk) 17:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
So far there is no consensus to include the image. Nor have you or any other editor made any reasonable case as to why the image is necessary in an article about Larry Sanger. Rvcx (talk) 17:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
You have never got consensus to remove the image in the first place. Your reason to delete the image in not a reason at all. QuackGuru (talk) 17:41, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Quack, please stop changing your comments. If you have something more to say, it's more helpful to carry on with the thread below the latest comments. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

The Jimmy Wales page has 6 images in the body while this page has zero images. This is absurd to delete a very good image from this page. QuackGuru (talk) 17:50, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

That's not a reason to have to include more images into this article...but if it was, lets check out other articles from popular website founders.
None of these has an image of the website that they were responsible for creating. None of these has an image being used under fair use. The Wales article may have 6 images, but that has nothing to do with this article. Do you know of any images that don't need fair use justification that would add something to this article? --OnoremDil 18:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages encourages images like the Bill Gates page which has 5 images in the body. This is the best image I can find for the CZ section that does add something to this article. "Whether it's a valid FUR or not is another issue." No, it is not another issue. No specific objection was made to the FUR. The other founder has 6 images but Larry Sanger is not allowed to have one image in the body? QuackGuru (talk) 19:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
People with more free images available sometimes end up with more images in their articles. As much as you seem to want it to be, this isn't about Jimbo vs Larry. I don't think the FUR adequately explains the need for the image in this article. People don't need to see a picture of the website to understand that he founded a website. Maybe a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content review would be helpful. I'd be happy to start a discussion there to get more input if that works for you. --OnoremDil 19:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
The FUR more than adequately explains the rationale for the image in this article. No specific objection to the FUR was made. QuackGuru (talk) 21:03, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
I still disagree. I do not believe that it passes Criteria 8. (Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.) --OnoremDil 21:15, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
You are changing your story again. You mean you agree with me when you did not explain why the rationale was not adequate. I explained the rationale is adequate by writing a FUR but you are unable to provide an objection to the FUR for this page. That means the image is free to use on this page. The image would increase the understanding of the CZ topic when the reader will understand there is another website similar Misplaced Pages with a main page. QuackGuru (talk) 22:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
You asked for a specific objection, so I gave one. I don't believe I've changed my story. I'm just able to be more specific as you continue to make changes and attempt to explain yourself. Simply writing a rationale doesn't automatically make it valid. How does the images presence significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic? How would excluding it be detrimental to that understanding? He founded a website. Why do we need a fair use image to explain that? --OnoremDil 22:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
"Simply writing a rationale doesn't automatically make it valid." No, simply implying the rationale is not valid without a specific objection is odd. A FUR was written but no specific objection to the text of the FUR was made. I don't understand why you are asking why the fair use image explains that Sanger founded Citizendium. Some editors claim the image is not relevant to this page but when Larry Sanger founded the web site it becomes clear it is relevant. I have already explained why the image meets Criteria 8 in my previous comment. QuackGuru (talk) 22:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
We're obviously not getting anywhere. My apologies for wasting your time. I've brought the issue up at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content review. --OnoremDil 22:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The images in the Wales article are unlike this one a) free b) high-quality or at least decipherable and c) there because I put them there. One of the reasons for this is that there are a huge selection of free Wales image, something which cannot be said in this instance. Regards,  Skomorokh  20:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Categories:
Talk:Larry Sanger: Difference between revisions Add topic