User talk:Dantecristo

Welcome!

Hello, Dantecristo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! JohnCD (talk) 17:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Anthony Keith Johnson

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Anthony Keith Johnson, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/Pending/02/dec02.htm. As a copyright violation, Anthony Keith Johnson appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Anthony Keith Johnson has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Anthony Keith Johnson and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Anthony Keith Johnson with a link to where we can find that note.
If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Anthony Keith Johnson.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please note that even if the copyright issue were resolved, material copied from from a web-site may well be unsuitable in tone for an encyclopedia article. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 17:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Anthony Keith Johnson

[moved from Talk:Anthony Keith JohnsonI would like to point out that the content used to create the "Anthony Keith Johnson" Web site is from my book, "Death Penalty USA: 2001 - 2002" excluding the citations that were included and referenced to on the Johnson Web site. There is no copyright infringement with www.prodeathpenalty.com because that Web site was not utilized to create the Johnson page. Please have "Runningonbrains" support his/her contention that this is the case by citing the exact verbage on the Johnson Web site that is allegedly in violation of copyright laws. In writing my book, the material was gathered from public records such as court opinions and court transcripts. Prodeathpenalty.com cannot copyright public documents such as court opinions, which is where the facts regarding the Johnson crime and prosecution were researched. --Dantecristo (talk) 21:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your text (emphasis mine):

After several shots had been fired, there was a pause in the gunfire. One of the men said: "Come on in, Bubba *** we have got him." As the two men in the room made their way to the door, but before they reached it, Cantrell fired one final shot and someone said "Oh." Cantrell’s wife then heard the sound of shuffling feet, as if one of the intruders was being assisted out of the house. After the intruders left, Cantrell’s wife waited a moment, looked up at her husband, noticed that he had blood all over him, and that she had blood all over her but had not been shot. She then called an ambulance and police to the scene. Cantrell sustained six gunshot wounds in the exchange, three in the right side of his chest, one in the left side of his chest, one in the back of his right arm, and one to his right middle finger. The bullets that struck him in the chest passed through his lungs and the large arteries from the heart, causing rapid death.

Text from http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/Pending/02/dec02.htm (again, emphasis added by me)

After several shots had been fired, there was a pause in the gunfire. One of the men said: "Come on in, Bubba ... we've got him." As the two men in the room made their way to the door, but before they reached it, Kenneth fired one final shot and someone said "Oh." Mrs. Cantrell then heard the sound of shuffling feet, as if one of the intruders was being assisted out of the house. After the intruders left, Mrs. Cantrell waited a moment, looked up at her husband, noticed that he had blood all over him, and that she had blood all over her but had not been shot. She then called an ambulance and police to the scene. Kenneth sustained six gunshot wounds in the exchange, three in the right side of his chest, one in the left side of his chest, one in the back of his right arm, and one to his right middle finger. The bullets that struck him in the chest passed through his lungs and the large arteries from the heart, causing rapid death.

Almost all of the article was similarly rendered. While not an exact copy, this is a clear violation of copyright. Merely changing a few words does not make it your own work: you must say it in your own words. If this is indeed from a public domain source, I ask that you provide it. Otherwise, we must abide by the terms listed on the http://www.prodeathpenalty.com, which state "Copyright 2009".

Also, I have moved your comment here, and I ask you to keep the discussion here (or deletion review if you'd like) since talk pages should be deleted if the article has been deleted. Thank you, and if you have any more questions you can post here or on my talk page.-RunningOnBrains^{(talk page)} 22:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Anthony Keith Johnson resposnse

I suggest you do your homework then because prodeathpenalty.com "lifted" their material directly from the public record: Johnson v. State (1986) 521 So.2d 1006, which by law is not material that a third party can copywrite. Please do your homework before making such arbitrary, ill-informed decisions to delete.--Dantecristo (talk) 13:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My decision to delete was not arbitrary or ill-informed. Please assume good faith when working on Wikipedia. Copyright violations are serious business: Wikimedia Foundation can, in theory, be held liable for copyrighted content hosted on their servers, so if there is a legitimate suspicion that the content submitted violates copyright, it must be deleted. Since you have now explained the situation, I will allow the page to stay, but I still urge you to read Wikipedia:Introduction and Wikipedia:Tutorial to learn the basics of editing and standard formatting. Ideally, even text taken from Public Domain sources should be re-written, and other sources should be introduced to increase the verifiability of the article text. Thank you for your contributions, and if you have any more questions, you can post here, or reach me on my talk page. -RunningOnBrains^{(talk page)} 13:30, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have also placed a note at the top of the page about it being from a Public Domain source, so other administrators do not make the same mistake. -RunningOnBrains^{(talk page)} 13:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough! And thanks.--Dantecristo (talk) 15:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Anthony Keith Johnson

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Anthony Keith Johnson, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

No assertion of notability for the convict, the victim/crime, the legal proceedings, or the public or legal aftermath

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. DMacks (talk) 05:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Anthony Keith Johnson

I have nominated Anthony Keith Johnson, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Keith Johnson. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. ^blurred _peace ☮ 05:02, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Stephen K. Johns

I have nominated Stephen K. Johns, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen K. Johns. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. ^blurred _peace ☮ 05:07, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Keith Johnson

Please do not re-create articles that have been deleted after a deletion discussion. If you believe you can make a good case against deletion, you may post at Deletion Review, but note you must be able to make a case that the subject meets the general and criminal-specific notability guidelines. If you would like to set that up I can help, just let me know.

I have moved the comment you posted below so that you can copy/paste if you'd like at Deletion Review. -RunningOnBrains^{(talk page)} 00:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's very notable about the prosecution of Anthony Keith Johnson is that the appellate court acknowledged that Johnson did not actually commit the murder for which he was sentenced to death. Also it is notable that Johnson was sentenced to death by a judge who actually rejected the jury's recommendation of life imprisonment. Most citizens are unaware that criminals can be put to death under such conditions. I think the article should NOT be deleted and should be reinstated as it was last posted. --Dantecristo (talk) 23:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]