User talk:Fuiszt

Relationship to Richard Fuisz

Hi, just to help clear up any issues of where you're coming from, could you state what your relationship to Richard Fuisz is? Thanks! --Mud4t 09:14, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure its kosher to give you my real name in this forum, but I am not the subject of the article if that is the question.Fuiszt 01:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the question was about your relationship to the subject (eg, family, collegue, etc.) Editing articles on a subject that a wikipedian has a close relationship is fine (very often the only real experts on a subject are those who work first hand with what they're writing about), but some sort of disclosure is helpful to keep from starting a conflict of interest witch hunt. I hope that's understandable. --Mud4t 01:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how adding a photo and changing formatting is going to start a discussion of conflict of interest-unless you think its too flattering a shot. I do know the subject (as I know GrannyD-the other person's page I have edited). Do you have any relation to the any of the links on the page?Fuiszt 02:13, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, many apologies if you think I'm stepping on your toes. The article I was referring to was Sports car knee syndrome, which has since been deleted and which you authored with Dr. Fuisz mentioned. I hope you can understand why your username, "Fuiszt" might make a person wonder where the information is coming from. To answer your last question: No, I have no relationship with anything on that page. And on top of that, I don't have any edits on those articles either. --Mud4t 02:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you comment on your relationship to Richard Fuisz? And reasons for removing referenced sources with your last edits? ThanksChitownhustler (talk) 23:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the CIA part-the cited source cites another unsourced source- Too late to have Scooter Libby confirm I'm afraid.Fuiszt (talk) 12:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Richard Fuisz.jpeg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Richard Fuisz.jpeg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 13:00, 8 January 2011 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:00, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]