User talk:HaroldKarey

Fair use rationale for Image:1598007467 frontcover.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:1598007467 frontcover.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) 03:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Understanding Apples

An article that you have been involved in editing, Understanding Apples, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Understanding Apples. Thank you. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:1598007467 frontcover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:1598007467 frontcover.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. BetacommandBot (talk) 03:29, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

April 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles, as you did to Moonshine. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" is strongly discouraged. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. I see you have added citations to J.S. Moore's books in several articles. Sorry, but this is a local author whose work has been published by a vanity publishing house. He is not yet notable by Wikipedia standards and his books don't warrant mention in broad-scope articles such as Tennessee, Moonshine, and Southern literature. --Orlady (talk) 18:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Vanity publishing

On my talk page you wrote

I appreciate your opinion, but I have to disagree. From what I understand this author JS Moore only self-publishes to retain the rights to his work. If you will check his reviews for his first book, they are outstanding and his book is ranked very well on Amazon. Lots of authors self-publish to avoid having to sign away the rights to their work. Look at Bridges of Madison County by Robert James Waller. He has a Wikipedia page of his own, yet he is a self published author as well.

Mr. Moore's works have been favorably reviewed on Amazon, but positive reviews on Amazon are not reliable indicators of the quality or notability of the work. Anybody can post a review on Amazon, and it is widely suspected that authors and publishers submit reviews to promote their works. As for his reasons for self-publishing, you may be correct, but it is still true that his works have not received attention by reliable sources (local newspaper announcements of book signings don't count as reliably sourced coverage of his work). Certainly there is no basis (beyond his own statements and those of his friends) to recommend his books as authoritative sources for further reading on topics such as Moonshine, Tennessee, Appalachian Mountains, or Southern literature. --Orlady (talk) 01:21, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd recommend at least reading the book then or contacting Kingsport residents before removing the information. His work isn't just his own because there are multiple other authors featured in the books. (HaroldKarey (talk) 13:34, 28 April 2008 (UTC))

To understand why your suggestions will not be adopted here, I suggest that you read the Wikipedia policy on "original research" and Wikipedia policy on verifiability, as well as the Wikipedia guideline on notability. --Orlady (talk) 15:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)